We’re So Down-Home Country. You Betcha!

John McCain’s faltering presidential campaign keeps grasping desperately at straws. The former beauty queen from Wasilla is one; NASCAR and country music is another.

It amazes me just how the GOP scrapes for the support of the working classes it has so badly screwed over in the past eight years. And the McCain campaign and its party are trotting out just about every cliché they can think of.

Consider Sarah Palin’s showing at Richmond International Raceway this week. According to the adoring – and so typically out-to-lunch – editorial writers at the hapless Richmond Times-Dispatch, Palin:

“… drew a huge throng of enthusiastic red-state voters. Jerry Kilgore warmed up an already perspiring crowd by leading the Pledge of Allegiance and offering a prayer for the country — and for the safety and well-being of the Republican ticket. Not a moment too soon, some wags might respond.

Country-music legend Hank Williams Jr. crooned the national anthem with gusto, if not entirely on key. This was an all-American crowd. The gaping chasm between the audience and those covering the event was illuminated by the British reporter who leaned over to ask, “Who is that?”

“It’s Hank Williams Jr.” an editorial writer responded. “His son?” the Brit queried. “Well, he can’t sing.” The gentleman missed the point. Moments later, Williams launched into a revised version of his hit song “Family Tradition.” The first line? “The left-wing, liberal media are a real close-knit family.” The audience bellowed its approval.”

So let’s try to follow the logic: Palin equals redneck equals working class approval equals Hank Williams Jr. equals putting down the “left-wing liberal media” equals GOP victory in November.

My, how smug. But let’s take the cliché apart. For one thing, every working class, pickup truck driving, deer-hunting good ole boy an girl in ole Virginny does not mindlessly go for every iconic symbol the khaki pants and Navy blazer GOP crowd can come up with. Certainly not all country musicians fall into the Hank Williams Jr. mindlessness set.

Just after I read ther RTD’s editorial this morning, something I try to avoid normally, I was driving my car and heard bluegrass patriarch Ralph Stanley on the radio for Obama, noting that eight years of misery is enough. Stanley, for those of you who don’t know, is from the Dickenson County coalfields and has been a legend in Virginia bluegrass since the 1940s. Unlike Hank Williams Jr., who when sober merely grooves on his daddy’s aging karma, Stanley has some brains and serves on the local school board from time to time when he’s not on the road.

I can think of a few other country music stars who aren’t exactly in the Bush-McCain-Palin just-us-folks camp. They include the Dixie Chicks, obviously, and Steve Earle whose powerful lyrics can really light a political fire.

If you want a truly scathing attack on the financial mess and the Bushies who created it, take a listen to bluegrass mandolin star Del McCoury’s new CD “Moneyland.” It is dedicated to the working class who have been badly hurt by eight years of GOP mismanagement and, interestingly, contains a clip or two of an FDR fireside chat.

My favorite song on the CD is “Forty Acres and a Fool,” which decries the exact, same suburban sprawl policies that have so defined development-happy, GOP-led boards of supervisors in such places as Loudoun and Prince William Counties. In the song, a newly-rich market trader buys a house in the country. Some lyrics:

“He’s got a pretty trophy wife.
Set her up in a McMansion
But now he’s trying to wreck my life
He’s driving out in his new Hummer
I tell my kids don’t walk to school
Took out my mailbox, squashed a possum
Forty Acres and a fool.”

Now that it’s a song even EMR can sink his teeth into. You betcha!

Peter Galuszka


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

68 responses to “We’re So Down-Home Country. You Betcha!”

  1. Anonymous Avatar

    Just what we need — Mr. Empty Suit — the community organizer. Obama is a creation of the media and the most unqualified candidate ever to run for president — bar none.

    He says he’s a uniter, but his voting record is far left. He was not a part of the Senate’s Gang of 14. Where’s the record of bringing left, right and center together? Only in the minds of the media.

    While I don’t agree with many of his policies, Mark Warner’s qualifications to be president are heads and tails above Obama’s. The same holds true for Hillary Clinton.

    The buffoon is proposing to restart FICA at $250 K. What will that do to small business? Could you imagine Mark Warner not understanding the impact of payroll taxes on small business? Not hardly.

    Gerry Connolly’s experience is greater than Obama’s. From what I’ve read, so are his ethical standards.

    My teen-aged daughter, who still thinks of herself has a liberal and has a Tim Kaine bumper sticker in her room, told me the other day that she doesn’t understand why so many people are being bamboozled by Obama. When you look behind the glitz, he has no substance.

    TMT

  2. Anonymous Avatar

    “When you look behind the glitz, he has no substance.”

    Fair enough.

    But, don’t fool yourself, neither does Palin or Kilgore.

    Palin might be able to pass the substance test if we could learn more about her…..Oh, wait….she’s not allowed to answer any questions.

    See you on election day!

  3. Anonymous Avatar

    “For those of you who don’t know”, Ralph Stanley twice ran for constitutional offices in Dickenson County and lost both times to his republican opponents. Rest assured not everyone in Dickenson County will agree Obama is a better choice for President just because Ralph Stanley says so. Anyone casting their vote for Obama based solely on Stanley’s endorsement probably shouldn’t be allowed to vote. We all need more meat than celebrity endorsements on which to base our votes.

  4. Anonymous Avatar

    Celebrity endorsements such as Hank Williams Jr.? Give me a break.

    Peter Galuszka

  5. A vote for McCain is a vote to continue trickle-down, supply-side economics….

    The question at hand is – is the Middle Class – little more than the figment of some do-gooders imagination…

    .. and that it is little more than a show poodle for the rich?

  6. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    PG: The housing and banking crisis didn’t begin on Jan 21, 2001. Economic analysis is analysis,not emotion and political rhetoric.

    Screwing with the laws of economics is like messing with the laws of physics – like testing gravity.

    The interconnectedness of our economic house should become apparent.

    On my blog – oh here it is – The foot bone is connected to the ankle bone. The ankle bone is connected to the shin bone. The shin bone is connected to the knee bone. Etc.

    The illegal alien invasion is connected to sub-prime mortgage mess. The sub-prime mortgage mess is connected to the Congressional pandering, profiting and mucking up the bank business for politics. The Congressional mess is connected to the restrictions on expanding the supply of energy. The limits on the supply of energy are connected to the doubling of gas prices. The doubling of gas prices is connected to 800,000 people losing their houses this Spring. 800,000 mortgages foreclosing is connected to banks failing. Etc.

  7. Anonymous Avatar

    See “More on the Decline of the Middle Claa Myth” at MJ Perry.blogspot.com.

    The first second thrid and fourth quintiles of earnigs have all increased earnings an average of 3.6 per year since 1994.

    Neither is the election necessarily characterized by rich vs poor. According to one poll a majority of people earning1-10 million will vote for McCain, but a majority of people earning more than 10 million will vote for Obama.

    In either case neither candidate is going to be able to make good on his promises.

    RH

  8. Groveton Avatar

    Ahhh celebrities. For some reason some Americans care what they think and say. The Dixie Chicks – three talented young ladies who have 0 college degrees among them. Of course, ole Hank Williams, Jr couldn’t even manage a high school degree. But we should sit up and listen when they have something to say about politics.

    And Ralph Stanley? Yeah, he’s a genius. This is what he said about his political career:

    “What happened is, somebody traded me off–they used my popularity and money to elect somebody else. I was done dirty. And I’m so proud that I was done dirty, because if I had been elected . . . I woulda had a job to do . . . maybe woulda finally quit (music). So that’s one time I was done dirty and I want to thank them for it now.”

    But the best is Del McCoury who sings “Forty Acres and a Fool” on his new CD Moneyland.

    Nothing like listening to a multi-millionaire singing about how much he hates multi-millionaires.

    Americans (of all political persuasions) need to remember the following:

    Entertainers are largely uneducated dumb ass ego maniacs. What they have to say about anything outside of entertainment is irrelevant and stupid to the point of being (unintentionally) comic.

    The only thing more ridiculous than the self serving comments of entertainers is the people who listen to those comments.

    Sorry, gotta go … Madonna is about to hold a press conference where she will put forth her new framework for macr-economic analysis.

  9. say… I think Groveton has stumbled onto something here..

    wasn’t that Reagan guy … an entertainer before he became Gov and then President?

    I mean.. if you can go from being an entertainer to commander in Chief… why not Hank Jr?

    Groveton – I think you’re putting too much of your faith in … logic…

    You gotta admit – putting together the electoral chart would be as simple as looking at country music record sales.

  10. Groveton Avatar

    Ronald Regan graduated from Dixon High School and Eureka College. He became the president of the Screen Actors Guild. He gave political speeches for General Electric, became governor and, ultimately, president.

    Hank, Jr couldn’t manage to get through high school.

    The Dixie Dipsticks couldn’t manage to obtain one college degree among the three of them.

    Show me an entertainer who has gone to high school, gone to college and educated himself or herself on the issues of the day. I’ll listen.

    Show me an entertainer who has done all of the above and is running for office on a balanced platform and I might even vote for them.

    After all, in his first term as governor of California, Ronald Regan froze government hiring and approved tax hikes to balance the budget.

    What would the Dixie Dimbulbs or In The Tank Hank do?

  11. Anonymous Avatar

    Like Daddy used to say:

    “Sonnybuck, if you want to live like a Republican, you’d better damn well vote Democratic.”

    Amen, Daddy.

    Love,

    Sonny

  12. Anonymous Avatar

    Shame on you, J.A. Bowden!

    Blaming undocumented workers for the subprime mortgage mess is a stretch and a half. Do you have any evidence that so many undocumented Latinos picked up McMansions for adjustable balloon mortgages that Wachovia went belly up? Where did you get that?

    Yes, not all the problems started wwhen W came into office. The blame can be certainly spread. But what I find amusing is that all these supposedly tightfisted, free market, little government Republicans ended up nationalizing part of our banking system and spending public money and running up the debt in ways that were truly unimaginable just a short while ago. And I am talking economics and not political emotion.

    Anyway, please share your evidence that aliens helped cause the suprime mess if you have any.

    Peter Galuszka

  13. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    PG:Please read more carefully.

    Illegal aliens are PART of the problem – of folks having mortgages without the discretionary income to deal with any continengcy – like the doubling of the gas price.

    PART of the problem of folks not having discretionary income in Virginia is a 3% increase in the total tax burden since the 70s. It equals about $256 a month for a family of 4 making $52k @ year.

    I estimates, in several places, about how many sub-primes were illegal aliens. It was a large number.

    If I were a better archivist, I could tell you where I found it. Since I’m not, you are welcome to do some homework on your own.

  14. bullfeathers.

    Why would someone have an opinion that they cannot back up with data?

    the vast, vast majority of the subprime mortgages are not for modest, truly “affordable” homes much less in the redlinned areas used for the original justification of making more loans … in the first place.

    Anyone with half a brain can see that the “problem” is people wanting “more” home – than they could afford.

    If anything, the undocumented have been accused of fully occupying a 4 bedroom home with each “bed” paying rent towards the overall rent or mortgage.

    The vast, vast majority of homes that are in foreclosure are in the 300,000 to 600,000 range .. hardly the type of loan that an undocumented could qualify for.

    The claim that the Feds “forced” bankers to make 500K loans to undocumented is so laughable that we know the folks who make such claims are not really interested in what actually happened and why – as much as they are interested in other personal agendas….

  15. Anonymous Avatar

    Nothing like another fact-free claim that Bush/Republicans have screwed the country, the working class or whatever. Oh wait, he quotes a country music song!

  16. Anonymous Avatar

    “When you look behind the glitz, he has no substance.”

    Fair enough.

    But, don’t fool yourself, neither does Palin or Kilgore.

    That’s it let’s decide the election based on comparisons of Obama to Palin or even better Kilgore. You betcha!

  17. Anonymous Avatar

    JAB,
    I agree with Larry G that if you can’t back up claims you shouldn’t make them, unless you are using humor to make a point. You seem to be mixing up 30-year tax trends with illegal immigrants. The connection?

    Also agree that no one forced these banks to make outsized loans. I, for one, am not exactly rich and for the better part of a decade –ever since I got back from an overseas assignment in 1996 — I was flogged for just about every kind of mortgage and financial product and credit card known to man. Among the worst were Newe Century Mortgage and COuntrywide (out of business) and Capital One (one wonders how they can stay in business).
    The blame Latinos and increasing taxes for their greed is absurd.
    Peter Galuszka

  18. Anonymous Avatar

    Larry – I don’t know what percentage of subprime loans were made to any particular demographic group and, accordingly, I’ve not made any comments in this area. But I do know quite a few lawyers who represent banks and other financial institutions. (Or should I say did represent them?)

    I’ve been told by quite a few of them that, when their clients have needed some regulatory approvals, they have often received pressure from activist groups to demonstrate greater compliance with the CRA by making more loans without normal documentation or with little down-payments or with acceptance of down-payment assistance, and to make those loans in so-called low-income areas.

    Unless I’ve been lied to, this suggests that there has, indeed, been some signficant number of bad loans made to “poor” people without sufficient incomes for political purposes.

    But, I would agree with you that this doesn’t demonstrate how much of the problem was caused by this segment of the “pseudo market.” I would suspect, without knowing, that a significant cause was also the sale of “move-up” housing to people with higher incomes, but who still could not afford the payments.

    It would be nice to know the facts. But this is Washington, D.C. Ain’t gonna happen.

    TMT

  19. Here is what we are being told is what happened.

    The Government told the Mortgage companies that if they did not make bad loans – that they would be punished.

    So.. they went out and made a whole bunch of bad loans so that they would not be punished.

    So..what exactly was going to happen to them if they did not make bad loans?

    What sanction(s) would intimidate a loan company to make a loan they knew was bad?

    What would happen to the loan company if they refused to make bad loans?

    Now.. Mr. Bush had a Republican House and a Republican Senate for how many years – that Republicans were warning about the “problem”…

    .. and so.. it was the Dems that caused it and the Dems that kept legislation from being passed by an ALL-Republican Administration and Congress?

    Oh.. and tell me again why this all-Republican group would force Mortgage companies to make loans to undocumented immigrants?

    Was this the same group of Republicans that were voting for increased funding for fences and immigration officers and detention centers?

    …but somehow they “forgot” to cut off the loans to undocumenteds?

    this is how foolish this narrative is… that some folks on the right are claiming .. happened…

    Plenty of blame going around – but I swear ..there seems to be no shortage of revisionist history folks peddling what amounts to … just plain intellectually dishonest pap.

  20. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Let’s see your data, Larry G.

  21. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Can’t is different from won’t take the time to do it now.

    Let’s see your data,PG.

  22. I did not make the claim and I challenged those who did to back up their claims…

    but I also pointed out just how stupid the claim is…

    because essentially the claim is that the same Republicans who had total control of the Presidency and Congress – and who were already concerned about illegal aliens and passing legislation to restrict them – did what?

    they totally overlooked the issue of mortgage companies being forced to make bad loans to illegals?

    don’t you think this kind of strains believability?

    If you believe this ( and I will when I see the data proving it)… then the Republicans must have been totally incompetent to essentially go against their own principles….

    so which is it?

    either way .. it doesn’t exactly make the R’s look too smart…but then again perhaps that’s why the revisionist history machine is going at full tilt.

  23. Anonymous Avatar

    Re homes foreclosed.

    Sorry,I don’t see it. I just flipped through foreclosure listings for the District and they were all modestly priced homes – under $400k and many around $200k.

    In Virginia there were a few $600 k to $1.2 million, but the vast majority were again, modest homes for the area – $250k to $450k.

    I don’t see that Mcmansions are over-represented in these areas. There are undoubtedly more of them, relatively spealing out in Loudoun where such homes prevail, but the numbers don’t seem to support the idea that overbuying Mcmansions is the/a primary cause.

    If it IS a cause, I’d suggest such opulent homes are probably preferrred by Republicans, so we can blame this mess on them.

    RH

  24. Anonymous Avatar

    At least one economist suggests a way out of this is to allow a lot more immigration, so they can suck up the excess housing stock – and start contributing to Social Security.

    RH

  25. Anonymous Avatar

    the vast, vast majority of the subprime mortgages are not for modest, truly “affordable” homes much less in the redlinned areas used for the original justification of making more loans … in the first place.

    Anyone with half a brain can see that the “problem” is people wanting “more” home – than they could afford.

    If anything, the undocumented have been accused of fully occupying a 4 bedroom home with each “bed” paying rent towards the overall rent or mortgage.

    The vast, vast majority of homes that are in foreclosure are in the 300,000 to 600,000 range .. hardly the type of loan that an undocumented could qualify for.

    So where’s the documentation? You lambast someone else for not providing any.

    Is it a coincidence that in most of the areas with the highest foreclosure rates the ratio of Hispanics is well above average?

  26. I’ll eat my share of the hat with regard to data or should I say .. a lack of data.

    I have yet to see data that demonstrates the level of undocumented alien involvement but again I point out that you had a total Republican control at a time when they were already moving legislatively to deny benefits.

    If someone has data to show that the undocumented played a large role in the meltdown – then I’d accept credible data but then I’d ask – why the R’s did not act when they had the majority in the first place?

    I cannot imagine any well-run bank as giving a mortgage to an undocumented alien to start with – if if the guys in charge were far left loons… it just doesn’t make good business sense.

    So the idea that a bunch of these loans were given to undocumented aliens because the Republican-controlled government “forced” them to is beyond any reasonable logic – at least to me.

    One would think that if loans were being made to undocumented that the R’s would be having hissy fits.. publically… and demanding denial of such loans.

    what is the truth?

    like I said – if someone provides credible data to prove the claim – then fine – I’ll accept that data – but I’m then going to ask why the R’s did not act…

  27. Anonymous Avatar

    You mean like California and Nevada?

    Is it because hispanics earn less and have to work harder to get a piece of the American Dream? Or because they are more greedy?

    RH

  28. HUD cries foul over illegal immigrant mortgage data

    "The U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development says there is no basis to news reports that more than 5 million bad mortgages are held by illegal immigrants.

    A HUD spokesman said Thursday his agency has no data showing the number of illegal immigrants holding foreclosed or bad mortgages."

    http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2008/10/06/daily54.html

    now.. tell me again where the folks who say that illegals got loans got their data from?

    folks.. this problem did not happen day before yesterday….you know…

    and again.. tell me who forced the mortgage companies to make these loans that no one has provided data to prove anyhow?

    and if the govt forced these mortgage companies to make these loans ..where where the Republicans when all of this was happening?

  29. Anonymous Avatar

    I cannot imagine any well-run bank as giving a mortgage to an undocumented alien to start with – if if the guys in charge were far left loons… it just doesn’t make good business sense.

    Then you’re wrong, unless you want to use the part about “well run” as an out. It’s been known for some time that banks like Bank of America and Wachovia have deliberately been courting illegals for mortgages.

    Mortgage lenders court illegal aliens

    So the idea that a bunch of these loans were given to undocumented aliens because the Republican-controlled government “forced” them to is beyond any reasonable logic – at least to me.

    That’s a straw man. No one said the government forced banks to lend specifically to illegals, although there was at least one program – by the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority in 2005 – targeted to illegals.

    As almost everyone knows by now, apparently excluding you, the GSE’s, under CEO’s appointed by
    Clinton, decided to start purchasing riskier mortgages from banks. That’s why the banks started making them. Again I thought everyone knew that by now. Many of those loans were certainly made to illegals.

    One would think that if loans were being made to undocumented that the R’s would be having hissy fits.. publically… and demanding denial of such loans.

    Based on the above information, obviously this is a wrong assumption on your part.

    like I said – if someone provides credible data to prove the claim – then fine – I’ll accept that data – but I’m then going to ask why the R’s did not act…

    Yeah it didn’t happen, but if it did, then it’s the R’s fault, according to a D!! Amazing. What do you mean by act? You would have to pass a law. Why didn’t they try to do that? Any number of possible reasons. The Bush admin. hasn’t had much interest in dealing with the whole illegal issue to begin with. Maybe you hadn’t caught on to that. The reason is partly political – fear of a backlash by Hispanic voters. Probably it was partly not wanting to shut off a source of revenue to banks. The Bush admin. had this “more the merrier” mentality from the start.

    It’s just that backlash that has turned CA into a very blue state ever since Gov. Wilson backed an anti-illegal ballot referendum in the early 90’s. You may recall that CA used to be a pretty reliable R state in Presidential elections. Now no one running for President even campaigns there because it’s so reliably D.

    It’s not hard to imagine the kind of attacks that would have been launched on the R’s by the D’s – even while some D’s kept denying many loans were even being made in the first place. Sure a Tancredo would have backed it, but not lots of other R’s. And Tancredo as I’m sure you’re aware, is some kind of far right wing nut! In part because of his illegal stance! Kind of damned if you do and damned if you don’t!

    BTW, the CA measure passed and then was ruled unconstitutional by the courts.

    Which brings up another possible reason why no one would try to pass such a law – the likelihood a court would throw it out. Like how a court has thrown out an illegal-immigrant law in Hazleton PA. You have heard of courts haven’t you?

    You have this erroneous take on everything – the R’s all took the same position on everything and had total power – why didn’t they do this or that?

  30. “The American Resistance”

    that’s your data source?

    … “THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION to confront the powers that would destroy our Republic and our way of life.”

    this is your source of data?

    James Bowden .. is this your source of data?

    okay guys…

    Name the folks in Congress (or any party) that said that the banks were loaning to illegals with bad credit and it needed to be stopped before it got out of hand and caused a financial meltdown…

    give me some names….

    and then tell me what legislation.. sponsored by the folks and supported by the Republican leadership in the House and Senate and by George Bush that failed to gain a majority support from the Republicans when they had control of the House, Senate, and Presidency… what was it – 3 years ago .. which was way after Clinton and way before Barney Franks?

    come on folks.. is the American Resistance the BEST you can do to support your view?

    and why does it say this on the American Resistance website:

    “If you wish to contact D.A. King, founder, please do so through The Dustin Inman Society. Thank you.” ?

    James Atticus …where are you?

    what say you?

  31. E M Risse Avatar

    Larry Gross:

    Many of your points are essentially the same ones EMR made in “Swift Boating the Mortgage Crisis.”

    You may have been too busy not seeing the human settlement pattern implications that you missed support for your position:

    Lending to unqualified borrowers including illegals is NOT the lynch pin of the Mortgage Meltdown.

    For data see today’s WaPo front page re Prince William dwelling sales.

    Free Market Uber Ales types should be jumping for joy about what is happening — for now.

    Latina’s and Latino’s lost their equity in homes that are being snapped up by “investers.”

    Anyone see anything a substantive difference between this story and what we have been saying about the Affordable and Accessible Housing Crisis at Bacons Rebellion since Feb of 2003?

    If you do see a difference, you may have not understood what EMR was saying… Our bad we are tryin to write more clearly. More on that soon.

    Only one caution. Investers seem to be looking more closely at appliances than at the location of the project and its relationship to J / H / S / R / A.

    That is too bad because a 40% percent drop over two years may not the bottom of the market for badly located dwellings.

    EMR

  32. Anonymous Avatar

    I do not understand what it is that EMR has against “investers”.

    Here is what Warren Buffet had to say:

    “What is likely, however, is that the market will move higher, perhaps substantially so, well before either sentiment or the economy turns up. So if you wait for the robins, spring will be over.

    A little history here: During the Depression, the Dow hit its low, 41, on July 8, 1932. Economic conditions, though, kept deteriorating until Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in March 1933. By that time, the market had already advanced 30 percent. Or think back to the early days of World War II, when things were going badly for the United States in Europe and the Pacific. The market hit bottom in April 1942, well before Allied fortunes turned. Again, in the early 1980s, the time to buy stocks was when inflation raged and the economy was in the tank. In short, bad news is an investor’s best friend. It lets you buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.

    Over the long term, the stock market news will be good. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497. “

    Now is the time to buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.

    RH

  33. …..” ..Now is the time to buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.”

    Ray.. you keep talking this way and next thing we know those illegals are going to be buying up foreclosed homes and renting them out to gangs of landscapers.

  34. Anonymous Avatar

    “Now is the time to buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.”

    This is 100% true. It’s even more true if you have the knowledge, time, and resources to manage your own investments. Most folks don’t.

    A fact that is often overlooked in regards to the stock market and all the people invested in it via 401k’s, mutual funds, etc. is that they really don’t have that much control over their own money. MOST folks don’t talk to a broker on a regular basis.

    Most people pick a “product” and let it ride. For MOST people investment decisions are made by someone else.

    The danger with any investment is that your money (at least what you need to retire on) may not be there when you need it.

    If you are 60 years old and your 401k has just lost 60% of it’s value you can kiss the golden years goodbye. Time IS NOT on your side. Then what?

    Where the market is headed is secondary to where it is now, particularly if you need the money immediately.

    I would say we have a system that needs serious revision when people we trust to manage our money do nothing more than gamble it away and then get to ride off into the sunset with hundreds of millions (some billions) of dollars.

  35. Groveton Avatar

    RH summarized the editorial by Warren Buffet in order to make his point. Fair enough. But I’d like to make a different point so I will reprint the entirety of the letter to the editor:

    “THE financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad. Its problems, moreover, have been leaking into the general economy, and the leaks are now turning into a gusher. In the near term, unemployment will rise, business activity will falter and headlines will continue to be scary.

    So … I’ve been buying American stocks. This is my personal account I’m talking about, in which I previously owned nothing but United States government bonds. (This description leaves aside my Berkshire Hathaway holdings, which are all committed to philanthropy.) If prices keep looking attractive, my non-Berkshire net worth will soon be 100 percent in United States equities.

    Why?

    A simple rule dictates my buying: Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful. And most certainly, fear is now widespread, gripping even seasoned investors. To be sure, investors are right to be wary of highly leveraged entities or businesses in weak competitive positions. But fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation’s many sound companies make no sense. These businesses will indeed suffer earnings hiccups, as they always have. But most major companies will be setting new profit records 5, 10 and 20 years from now.

    Let me be clear on one point: I can’t predict the short-term movements of the stock market. I haven’t the faintest idea as to whether stocks will be higher or lower a month — or a year — from now. What is likely, however, is that the market will move higher, perhaps substantially so, well before either sentiment or the economy turns up. So if you wait for the robins, spring will be over.

    A little history here: During the Depression, the Dow hit its low, 41, on July 8, 1932. Economic conditions, though, kept deteriorating until Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in March 1933. By that time, the market had already advanced 30 percent. Or think back to the early days of World War II, when things were going badly for the United States in Europe and the Pacific. The market hit bottom in April 1942, well before Allied fortunes turned. Again, in the early 1980s, the time to buy stocks was when inflation raged and the economy was in the tank. In short, bad news is an investor’s best friend. It lets you buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.

    Over the long term, the stock market news will be good. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497.

    You might think it would have been impossible for an investor to lose money during a century marked by such an extraordinary gain. But some investors did. The hapless ones bought stocks only when they felt comfort in doing so and then proceeded to sell when the headlines made them queasy.

    Today people who hold cash equivalents feel comfortable. They shouldn’t. They have opted for a terrible long-term asset, one that pays virtually nothing and is certain to depreciate in value. Indeed, the policies that government will follow in its efforts to alleviate the current crisis will probably prove inflationary and therefore accelerate declines in the real value of cash accounts.

    Equities will almost certainly outperform cash over the next decade, probably by a substantial degree. Those investors who cling now to cash are betting they can efficiently time their move away from it later. In waiting for the comfort of good news, they are ignoring Wayne Gretzky’s advice: “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been.”

    I don’t like to opine on the stock market, and again I emphasize that I have no idea what the market will do in the short term. Nevertheless, I’ll follow the lead of a restaurant that opened in an empty bank building and then advertised: “Put your mouth where your money was.” Today my money and my mouth both say equities.

    Warren E. Buffett is the chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway, a diversified holding company.”.

    So, Mr. Buffet was out of the US equity market. Then he started buying equities. Then he wrote a letter to the editor pumping equities.

    Let’s consider the corollary of a public company CEO.

    1. He owns none of his company’s stock.
    2. He buys stock in his company.
    3. He makes public comments pumping the stock.
    4. He goes to jail.

    Many will say that the entirety of the US equity market is no single company. True. But Warren Buffet is no single investor either. He has enough money to influence whole sectors of a market. He has enough influence to make people buy and sell – at scale.

    Did he write the letter to the editor before he started buying US equities? “So … I’ve been buying American stocks. This is my personal account I’m talking about, in which I previously owned nothing but United States government bonds.”. Apparently not.

    Do you think he’ll write another letter to the editor before he starts selling those same US equities? I doubt it.

    Don’t be a dupe of this guy. Or Soros or any of the other filthy rich people who make their money buying other companies, speculating in currency, etc.

  36. E M Risse Avatar

    Anon 12:00 and Groveton do a very good job — along with the DOW performance over the past week — of spelling out why EMR calls the stock market a gambling venue.

    Citizens must find a way to seperate investers from speculators, especially when it come to land and land use locations.

    We call it Fundamental Transformation.

    EMR

  37. Anonymous Avatar

    I’ll try to take Groveton’s last point a bit further. IMO, one of the most outrageous policies is to lump the family that earns say $200-$300 K per year with the Warren Buffets, Hollywood mega-stars; CEOs of huge corporations, star pro-athletes, etc.

    Needless to say, a family making that much money is hardly struggling. But when contrasted to the real big money people, there is little comparison. But notice most “progressive” proposals would snare the two with the same tax increases. Witness Mr. Empty Suit. In fact, I suspect without proof, that that many at the top would fare much better than our well-earning family.

    If progressives really want to get progressive, why not really draw lines that separate our well-earning family from the mega-earners?

    This is just like Buffet’s support for estate taxes. He’s bought numerous businesses that had to sell to pay the taxes and at significant discounts.

    The moderately successful need to watch their backs at all times.

    TMT

  38. E M Risse Avatar

    TMT:

    I believe you are right. “Progressive” ought to mean “progressive” with a lot of steps.

    EMR

  39. E M Risse Avatar

    Anon said:

    “Most people pick a “product” and let it ride. For MOST people investment decisions are made by someone else.”

    The is very true.

    However, some — especially some who are retired or at the upper edge of the Baby Boomers — have some money they have saved and try to play with the big boys.

    Just heard a disaster story about an elderly acquaintance who thought he was “investing” but turns out he was gambling and lost.

    EMR

  40. E M Risse Avatar

    One other note on the points raised by Groveton and TMT:

    Check Reich’s data on the “family worth” of Waltons, Gates and Buffetts. Then check the total Household weath of the bottom 50 percent of the total population.

    Also check how the top 1 percent of the Ziggurat wealth has grown over the past two decades vs the “bottom” 99 percent of the Ziggurat.

    One driving force is that a lot of the “TMT Class” Households (and those above and below the “TMT Class” incomes) like to bundle their votes and their political party contributions — to both parties — with those in the top 1 percent in hopes that they will get some curmbs.

    EMR

  41. Anonymous Avatar

    Jesus.

    The U.S. Is the same place it was six months ago. Businesses are still in business and always will be. The U.S. is still the most productive nation on earth.

    EMR thinks the stock market is gambling, but he is missing the point, as usual. The guy who spends all his time watching his back, isn’t looking where he is going.

    You can own your own company, or you can own part of many companies, or you can be an employee of a company. In that case, you are gambling your life on the success of your company, not jsut your money.

    Each of those choices involves risk, and therefore everyone is gambling. All of the money that you do not need to spend is going to go somewhere, and wherever that is,makes you a speculator in that product.

    Put it in your mattress, and you are speculating that cash is king, and that every other investment out there will earn you less than your mattress. Put it in the bank, and they turn around and loan it to some business. You are speculating that the bank knows whot it is doing. Buy bonds and specualate tht the interest youearn will at least outrun inflation. You can buy something substantial that you don’t need hoping to sell it later for more than it costs you to keep(speculate). Go buy a D-9 cat. Maybe someday construction will come back in vogue.

    No matter what you do, you are gambling that your idea is better than the next guy’s. If recent events have shown us anything, it is that nothing is “safe”. Even government bonds. You loan money to the government, and they give it away.

    ———————-

    Today, there are products available which allow you to buy stock in one or many companies without ever talking to a broker. Also bonds, mutual funds and other financial devices like spiders.

    Any moron with a few dollars to spare can own shares or even fractions of shares in dozens of companies, to spread out the risk, antionally and internationally.

    Surely you don’t believe that the entire world is going flat broke.

    You can basically own and operate your own mutual fund. You won’t be on a par with Warren Buffet, but you will have most of the same choices available to you.

    It doesn’t even take a lot of time or attention, or cost much to do. Are my holdings down? Sure. But bad as it is, the value of my accounts is still 500% of the cash money I put in.

    How is that possible? I didn’t put most of the money in: it came from dividends – paid by the stocks and bonds themselves.

    When you see an item on sale in the store, at 40% off, and assuming it is something you want, do you wait for the price to go back up before you buy? Right now, all of America is on sale at bargain prices. Those prices might even go lower.

    So what?

    You are not going to buy all of America at one stop. Not even Warren Buffet can do that.

    Each week, you have some money left over that you do not need this week. Whatever you do with it is a gamble. Put a dollar in your mattress and gamble that you might be able to buy a gumball with it in twenty years. If you are convinced that the world is going to hell in a handbasket and 400 people will have ALL the money, then what difference does it make HOW you lose? You might as well gamble if you think that is the situation.

    So, if you think the stock market is gambling, then just look at it as entertainment. I was quite entertained when I made 30% on three stocks last week. I only had $300 to play with, so I only made $90. So, I’m not Warren Buffet. Next week, maybe I’ll have another $300 extra.

    I own shares in 50 companies, including Berkshire Hathaway, but my portfolio is not large in value. I own only a few share of each comapny. Out of fifty, six of my investments are in the red. I’m not worried, because they are still paying dividends. Even if they never go back up, I’ll still have income that I don’t have to work for.

    These products are easy to use, and don’t take a lot of time. It is not rocket science to put together a diversified portfolio of stocks, cash investments, and bonds. Let the income from your cash and bonds automatically buy more stocks. They will get more shares when the price is low and fewer when it is high.

    When the ratio of stocks to bonds gets too high for your age, move some more into bonds. You will then have more cash flow buying more stocks.

    Is there risk? Sure, If the market really tanks, there won’t be anyone to pay back the bonds either. If you buy a D-9 cat, there won’t be anyone who needs that, either. There is risk EVERYWHERE.

    —————————–

    Warren Buffet is an old guy with more money than God. He can’t take it with him. What possible reason would he have to try to shill the public, other than the entertainment? Is he so shallow that the ONLY thing that matters is accumulating more?

    EMR should stop worrying so much and go have some fun. Who knows, you too might be in the top half of the ziggurat. Not that it makes any difference. You can make more money than 95% of the population, and there will still be more wealth above you than below.

    Does that mean you should stop trying? That you can’t have some fun? What, exactly does EMR do with his unused money? Is he investing in functionally located housing?

    ——————————
    Funny story. Guy opens a restaurant where bank used to be. Sign outside says “Put your mouth where your money used to be.”

    So OK EMR had an elderly acquaintance who had some bad luck, for now. Who is to say that any other choice would not have been just as bad? What was his other choice, more french fries?

    He could have opened a restaurant, where the failure rate is a lot worse than the bank failure rate. And there is no Food Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    If EMR is not investing in functionally located housing, then maybe he should put his money where his mouth is. I’m sure he could rationalize becoming a speculator the same way he rationalizes his two SUV’s.

    ——————————–

    Not putting all your eggs in one basket doesn’t mean doing without eggs or baskets. I believe people will still buy eggs, so I’m going to “gamble” on some chickens. If I lose my bet, well, I’ll have to eat the humble chicken pie.

    RH

  42. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    RH is right. Why not go for broke? For the last 20 years that’s what Americans have been doing anyway. Buy a bigger house, or a fancy car, and don’t forget this week’s lottery ticket. If they lose, so what? It’s only money and as we all know, that money is merely a piece of paper that is only worth what a majority of people believe it’s worth.

    Why not trade it for another piece of paper that is supposed to represent a share of a company. That way you can continue the fantasy until the day you die without realizing you were investing in a con game with no rights to ownership of anything but that fancy certificate.

    You want to gamble? Forget the mutual funds and IRAs. Save up 50 grand and open up a trading account. That way win or lose, you won’t have any one to blame but yourself and you won’t have to wait decades to find out you were a sucker.

    You know, in a way it’s kind of funny. When I first started messing with investments I used to see all these really old guys hanging out at the brokerage watching the ticker screen. As a young guy, I put my re-enlistment bonus money in the supposedly new way to invest, a mutual fund, just ahead of the 73 crash. Upon my return from deployment I realized I had learned a valuable lesson. Never leave the brokerage.

    Now the brokerage follows me everywhere.

  43. J. Scott Avatar

    Good old Ralph, don’t you just love an old Democrat from the South. You know the ones that found their way into the Republican ranks but still at the very heart of things were simply always old Virginia Democrats. Should we be surprised that man enterrign the twilight of his life would want to go back to his the old Party; I mean we all know the GOP doesn’t have much by way of the AARP anyway. Its funny how we start out really anti-establishment in our early days and vote Democrat, then get a real job, get married have kids and turn Republican and then as we near or enter retirement age realize that all the things we will need for the remaining years are really backed by the Democrats and we shift back. Thats the beauty of America, but given the aging boomer population spells trouble for the GOP for many years to come unless that actually want to fix entitlement programs and not just eliminate them.

  44. Anonymous Avatar

    “Save up 50 grand and open up a trading account.”

    Darrell, you no longer need anything like $50 grand to open your own trading account. That is one of the points I was making. There are brokerages what will let you trade for a very low flat monthly fee.

    There are also DRIPS and other means by which you can buy small blocks of shares, with no commission.

    Or if you want to live in fantasy land there are on line sites where you can trade with play money, just to test your ideas or skills. If you are the high scorer in the game, there is pretty good prize money. http://www.wall street survivor.com

    Some commercial sites will let you open a fantasy account as a teaser. But if you are only talking about $5 or $20 grand that you saved up as “unused and unneeded” moey anyway, then you can now afford to have a brokerage account, basically for the entertainment value.

    In my case, the enetertainment was doubling my money. Then I took half out. From hereon out, whatever I make is free money becasue I have no cash risk of my own.

    Anyway speaking of a fancy paper certificate with no real value, and no rights of ownwership, what do you think money is?

    But, you do raise another issue, that of trading. If trading is your game then you need to have the brokerage follow you around. As you point out, that is easy to do. But if you have to worry about the money in your account all the time, now it is a job.

    If you can’t afford to lose the money in your account, then you should invest in something else (which you still might lose).

    RH

  45. Anonymous Avatar

    "Doom and Gloom? Consider Hedging with Intrade

    Has the late unpleasantness got you down? The perfect solution is right in front of you. Use Intrade as a hedge. Using money to offset real hardship is a time-honored trick. Insurance companies rely upon this approach to smooth over all manner of downers and upsets. So if you feel strongly about the election or the financial crisis, why not buy a little insurance of your own?

    Hope the economy pulls through? We all do. But if it doesn't, owning a little US.RECESSION.08 will help smooth the rough ride. What better way to counter your own personal recession than a little extra return when it hits?

    It doesn't end there. Why not hedge against higher taxes on "Highest Marginal Single-Filer Fed Income Tax Rate to be Equal or Greater than 36% in 2009 Tax Year"? Boy, higher income taxes. That doesn't sound fun. But if it happens, an investment of $41 on 2009.INCOME.TAXRATE.>36% today will be worth $100. You could even invest just enough to cover a tax hike. No, really. Why not?"

    Carpe Diem

  46. re: I’m still trying to figure this out…

    let me try again…

    If you are smart enough to live in a functional settlement pattern then you are also smart enough to not gamble your money in the stock market.

    Conversely.. if you do not live in a balanced community .. i.e. not smart enough to do that.. then you are likely to commute in a car and buy a wrong size house in the wrong place and commute in a large private auto .. AND …gamble in the stock market..

    Have I got it right now?

  47. Anonymous Avatar

    Yeah, but if you live in a functional settlement pattern, you would be better off. If we all lived in functional settlement patterns we would all be better off.

    What we do with all that money we saved? a) Stock market b) Mass overconsumption c) pay for the massive government intervention EMR tells us we need to make it happen.

    RH

  48. Ray Hyde Avatar

    Speaking of speculating:

    you would hate to be invested in alternative energy, right now.

    RH

  49. ….if we all lived in functional settlement patterns we would all be better off.

    What we do with all that money we saved?

    We’d save money if we lived in a balanced community?

  50. Anonymous Avatar

    According to EMR.

    RH

  51. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    Ah but see your 401k is also trading, whether you are invested in bonds or stocks. If you don’t think so, just ask a few of the people like Groveton who say they now have 201k’s.

    If you are in the market you can’t afford to take your eye off the board for an instant. Even if you don’t, Mr. Market moves faster than your call to the mutual fund, because the fund doesn’t settle until the end of the day. A one day 800 point spread can kill your plans for a comfortable retirement and force you to take even more risk.

    Pension funds got into riskier investments after the dot com bust, and were still trying to regain their losses when this latest situation hit. Many individual investors are now dollar cost averaging themselves into the poor house, IF it hasn’t been foreclosed yet.

  52. Anonymous Avatar

    Great article. And very much on the mark. McCain/Palin simply does not have the intelligence to move beyond cliche.

    As for the first blogger, who comments on credentials, I am afraid that you are misinformed about Sen. Obama.

    He was a poor kid who traveled this country and the world with his family. He graduated from 2 ivy league schools and earned honors as well as was elected to preside over the very prestigious Harvard Law Review. He was an attorney at a major law firm. Later, he became a civil rights attorney. He worked as a community organizer in the devasted South Chicago city and helped bring jobs to that community. He was in state Senate for 8 years and now serves as US Senator.

    He has struggled with poverty and prevailed. He studied our constitution. He has worked for everyday people. He is a fighter.
    His heart belongs to us, the common man. Yet, he is brilliant as all. And our president should represent the best of us while loving us at the same time.

    Sonny, you are funny!

    Check out http://www.speakoutonpalin.com, anohter great site where everyday women talk about their concerns regarding the election and Gov. Palin.

  53. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Barack Hussein Obama accomplished nothing as a legislator in Illinois and the US Senate except amass the most Liberal voting record in just 2 years – and vote for the barbaric infanticide of partial birth abortion. Name his legisltation. Why is he for tax cuts now – when he never proposed any before? Name one acomplishment as a community organizer. Show us one law article. Who wrote one of his books for him? What were his SATS and LSATs?

    Enjoy your Kool Aid.

  54. …” Ah but see your 401k is also trading, whether you are invested in bonds or stocks.”

    Many years ago, people who “played” the stock market with their savings were considered downright irresponsible – no different than going to the race track or playing the “numbers” (way back before the Government took over from the Mob and started selling their own numbers – but called it Lottery).

    You were only supposed to be using money – that you could afford to lose – without endangering/harming what you had already put aside for rainy day/retirement/saving up for a house or car…. or if you got sick.

    I think the entire concept of 401Ks (like Darrell) has changed – as the world economy and individual companies fortunes have changed.

    There are no more companies that stay the same year after year for 30, 40 or 50 years that you can buy stock in and rest assured that that company won’t be acquired, merged or sold for parts.

    “Investing” in such companies is fools play … you now must invest in industries, sectors, and even those can be in turmoil.

    I think the whole concept of “investing” has changed and is continuing to change even more and just like automobile engines .. it’s not for back-yard mechanics anymore.

  55. re: Obama/McCain and kool-aid

    To a certain degree.. it’s not about Obama and his lack of experience…or McCain and his “experience”.

    it’s a vote on whether we continue to pretty much do business the way that the folks who vote with Bush and the current Republican Philosophy believe we should.

    Many folks right now don’t want to continue the status quo – they want things to change – even at the risk that such change holds risk.

    It’s sort of like a divorce.

    You have no idea how you are going to fare in the future – you just know that the current situation is no longer acceptable.

    Conservatives have a great deal of trouble with this concept.

    They almost always think that “somehow” you can fix the stuff that is not working right and move on whereas other folks think.. you’re just turning the same crank with the same results.

    Change happens.

  56. Anonymous Avatar

    JAB,
    To you a “liberal” voting record is a sign of shame; to others, it may be praiseworthy. Depends on your point of view, I guess.
    Also, my understanding is that Obama may have actually written the books he has published. That is not the case with John McCain.

    Peter Galuszka

  57. Anonymous Avatar

    “Many individual investors are now dollar cost averaging themselves into the poor house, IF it hasn’t been foreclosed yet.”

    Maybe.

    You own one one/millionth of a company. The value of the company is cut in half. You still own one/one millionth of what is left.

    And you are still better off than the guy that owns nothing. You company can still go back up, and it can still pay dividends. Try that with a mattress.

    During the depression it took ten years for the market to regain its former value. But if you were dollar cost averaging throughtout the period, you would have recovered your losses in three years or less.

    Companies that are acquired ar frewuently bought for a premium. Having your company bought out from under you isn’t a bad thing. Then, if you are really diversified, you may well own shares in both the company acquired and the one sold. then you win either way. Or lose either way (not all mergers are successful).

    Darrell is right about 401k’s, if he is talking about mutual funds. But as I say, it is possible to have your own self directed 401kaccount, with your own stocks and bonds in it, which you buy and sell at your leisure. You can set your own automatic traps and triggers to capture gains and avoid losses.

    Even without that, there are different kinds of mutaul funds, some actively traded, and some not, or traded as per preset rule.

    Yes, you can take losses, that is the risk investors get paid for. If it worries you, put a little in and work it until you double your money. Then take your original investment back out. From there on out you are “risk free” because all you can lose is speculative money anyway.

    Don’t put any money in the market that you can’t afford to do without. That still leaves you with the problem of where else to put it, which might very well (and probably does) have a lower most probable value over time.

    I’ve even heard an ad recently to “put yourself in control” of you rown investment and your own destiny.

    It was for a pizza franchise.

    RH

  58. Ray Hyde Avatar

    Barack Obama and the Democrats; John McCain and the Republicans are both liars and hypocrites.

    Neither party has a consistent philosophy based on reason or morals.

    Neither candidate can deliver anything like what they are promising. Their promises are canned by the parties.

    The parties are beholden to moneyed interests that use the system to gain economic or market advantage, frequently in the guise of safety or environmental issues.

    The energy and health care initiatives on both sides are an outright fraud and total misstatement of facts. So are the tax initiatives. We are not going to cut taxes and balance the budget. We are not going to tax only the rich, spend more, and balance the budget. We are not going to get everything on the list. We are not going to create 5 million new renewable energy jobs. We aren’t going to solve problems at home, let alone in the middle east.

    KoolAid at least, is bipartisan.

    However, it is my opinion at this point, that even if “None of the Above” was on the ballot Barack Obama would still win.

    RH

  59. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    “Darrell is right about 401k’s, if he is talking about mutual funds. But as I say, it is possible to have your own self directed 401kaccount, with your own stocks and bonds in it, which you buy and sell at your leisure.”

    Exactly. I have several different mutuals/IRA’s/401k’s. I moved all but my trading account out of stocks well over a year ago. I don’t trade daily because of the day job. But vacation time is a good time to play the market.

    The time will come to go all in, but right now ain’t it.

  60. Ray Hyde Avatar

    I’m not smart enough to time the market: it is always time to be in. I take profits to diversify more (buy). I don’t trade daily. I just look for companies that produce good stuff I can understand, that I know people will want to own or need to use.

    Had I got entirely out a year ago, I would have been better off today, just as you say. On the other hand, if you are out of the market for just a few of the best days, you will also miss much of the gains.

    There isn’t much point in selling high and buying high.

    RH

  61. Anonymous Avatar

    Hey all you conservative Baconauts!
    (Especially YOU, James Atticus Bowden)

    I’ve been on the road and just got around to reading Saturday’s Wall Street Journal. I was impressed by Peggy Noonan’s piece “Pailin’s Failin’” Since Noonan is one of your more articulate contemporaries, I thought I’d quote her:

    “In the end, the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It’s no good, not for conservatism, and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and his idealism.”

    Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    Peter Galuszka

  62. Anonymous Avatar

    The problem with STARTING from a philosophical or ethical or political set of views is that it makes it hard to adjust when the real world doesn’t fit your vision or expectation.

    Consider health care. One view is that employee based health care is a free market invention. Post war employers invented this as a way to entice employees to their companies.

    Clearly this free market has failed, yet we remain philosophically and politically opposed to what is advertized as “Nationalized Health Care”.

    With good reason. Even though that need not be the final outcome. But neither candidate has put forth a clear explanation of what they would do about this.

    Some people espouse a solution that is more free market than what we have – divorce health care from the employers and let the insurors and the insured compete on a level playing field. their argument is that only a free market – including free access to the health care profession which is now operated as a guild, can solve the current problems.

    When you point out that other countries have health care at a fraction of the costs of U.S heathcare, they retort that the system is “not as good” that care is “rationed” etc.

    And yet the statistics on neo-natal survival, heart disease, and longevity don’t show any such differences.

    Clearly we cannot allow the health care providers to believe any outrageous bill they submit will be paid. Just as clearly we cannot allow the insurors to cherry pick who and what they insure, or make promises they don’t keep. Neither can we allow the uninsured to expect emergency room care for free. And we can expect that there will be indigents for whom both health insurance and health care is permanently out of reach.

    This cannot be solved starting from either a liberal or conservative place, spinning wildly as we go.

    I believe health care must be divorced from our employers because it creates a weak link: lack of insurance between employment, bias and higher costs for the self employed, intermittent coverage which allows “pre-existing” conditions to slip in, etc etc.

    There is no reason to think you get better insurance, just because it comes from your employer. Even worse, if you get sick enough to lose your job, you have no insurance just when you need it most. There is no “insurance” in a system that collects payment for 35 years and then dumps you because you become ill. There is no “insurance” in a system that refuses to insure your heart just because you have chronic psoriasis.

    Whatever we do, the system needs to be fixed: its flaws affect liberals and conservatives alike. But there isn’t any reason to think that a liberal solution is better (or worse) than a conservative solution, ort vice versa. We need to cut that crap out and work on a good solution.

    RH

  63. As a country, we support the basic principles behind public education even if we are less than thrilled with the results.

    The concept is that every child should receive the opportunity.

    I view health care the same way.

    We should cover everyone with basic access and care.

    If some folks want “more”, then .. buy a add-on market-based supplement.

    But having a system where we agree to pay three times the cost for medical care for those without insurance and sending them to the emergency room for their care is just plain dumb.

    These same folks do not receive preventative care – which can and does head off more serious (and more expensive) problems.

    And one of the highest ironies in my view is that regardless of political stripe – most of us believe that small businesses and start-up companies are vital to the economic vitality of the country – and the number 1 threat to small businesses is their vulnerability on being able to provide health insurance especially to high-risk or pre-existing conditions employee… someone who may be almost worth their weight in gold but essentially not insurable.

    Our blind allegiance to the “free market” has produced a health care system that cherry-picks while it throws others under the bus… is grossly inefficient… preferring paperwork to unified electronic records.

    Our “free market” health care preys on the vulnerable – those at the margins.

    If they have no insurance and try to pay with cash – they have to pay MORE than those who have insurance.

    I could go on and on but in my view – to support the current system of health care is unconscionable.

    and John McCain.. makes it clear, he pretty much supports the system as currently operated.

  64. Ray Hyde Avatar

    We should cover everyone with basic access and care.

    Which is where we depart.

    I’d settle for insurance on a level playing field.

    I don’t think you are realistically likely to get the same kind of rural access as urban access, for example.

    Nor do I think we should provide the care directly, there we can let the market compete for the insurance money available. We can help by eliminating some of the guild characteristics of health care.

    Otherwise, I have no problem with basic coverage, large deductible, and with additional coverage available at extra cost.

    I don’t think either candidate has made a clear exposition of his plan or contrasted it with the others.

    Obama’s ads say his plan “lets you keep your own doctor” which implies that McCains doesn’t. But it is actually a reaction to scare tactics concerning socialized medicine.

    We need to stop that crap and get down to some serious discussions about how to get this done without making all of us broke.

    If we think we can get to the point of renewable energy through a moon project or Manhattan project style of effort, then surely we can fix this mess.

    RH

  65. The Federal Health care plan works this way:

    No one can be denied coverage – for any reason.

    Then, there are about a dozen companies and for each company several plans that range from low premiums and mostly catastrophic coverage to gold-plated plans.

    This is what I would advocate.

    We already provide this to folks on Medicare and folks retired from the Armed Forces, and all Federal retirees as well as some State plans.

    We have so much waste in the current system – for instance, we have prescription drug and diagnosis and treatment redundancy and snafus because Doctor’s do not work off of a unified health record for patients.

    and the reason given by Doctors is that it “costs too much”.

    this is the dumb kind of stuff that we allow the “free market” to do and the “free market” could care less if you and I pay 50% more for health care to cover such problems.

    When you walk into a Doctor’s office you see a bunch of employees … doing what?

    shuffling paper…

    you and I are paying for that… and it’s one of the reasons why health insurance companies look to cut costs in other ways…

    Having a health care system that excludes some people is akin to our education system saying they will not educate special needs kids.

    It’s unacceptable.

  66. re: serious discussions

    you do this the same way you do other things.

    You cover what is necessary for basic health and care and you price the “extras” and you means-test the premiums.

    this is not rocket science. It boils down to the Government looking out for it’s citizens MORE than it looks out for insurance company profits.

    The “free market” for health care is a joke if you or someone in your family has a pre-existing condition – which means even if you have health care – that you cannot change jobs if the health insurance denies coverage for pre-existing conditions.

    so people are trapped by their circumstances that they did not cause.

    our current system kills small business and it hurts our world market competitiveness; it causes jobs to be outsourced to places where health care is not the responsibility of the business.

    If we can provide equitable health care to Federal Retirees – which includes every Congressman, every Cabinet member and their staffs and employees and the President – we can cover our citizens.

  67. Ray Hyde Avatar

    and you means-test the premiums.

    Why means test the premiums? The risk to insure a wealthy person is no more (and probably al lot less) than the risk to insure a poor person.

  68. because the people who can afford it should pay full price for it.

    It’s the same idea as progressive taxation.

    When you work and get your paycheck – the amount deducted is based on how much you earn – the more you earn – the more they take out….

    Means testing has to be part of the solution.

    I predict we’ll see means-testing on Social Security and Medicare – if those systems are to be kept from going broke.

Leave a Reply