Hamburger Stimulus

causes? (0.00 / 0)

wait; you lost me - what does "caused primarily by corporate over-regulation of the democratic sector of U.S. society" mean?

because it looks like there was not only a lack of regulation, but perhaps even more importantly, a lack of enforcement of existing regulation/oversight.

and what's "the democratic sector of U.S. society"?  

---

by: mvgfr @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:41:05 PM UTC

Clue (4.00 / 2)

"corporate over-regulation of the democratic sector of U.S. society"

As in the corporate sector was regulating the government and public, rather than the other way around.

---

by: CarbonCopy @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 15:49:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You hit it (4.00 / 1)

The point is, like today, prior to the Depression, large corporate/moneyed interests "regulated" how the government acted.  Money controlled or owned far too many politicians and government agency heads and the corporate/moneyed/large business interests controlled the political options of the electorate.

Today we hear from the teabagger community and our corporate filter media that government is going too far in regulating the economy. Such bullshit. The opposite is closer to the truth. 

The extent of regulation we have today, or which is being proposed to reform our broken economy, is hardly more than putting up rules-of-the-road. To the extent we allow regulation of the economy, it is designed to allow capitalism to run more efficiently and to give more transparency to a dynamic economy. 

The problem then, like now, is that we grossly under-regulated the financial systems on which the entire country relied and which, ironically, only democracy made possible.  At the same time, our out-of-control financial institutions are exercising excessive influence and control (regulation) over our government, our politicians, our media and our ability to affect political reform.

sláinte,
cl

-- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

---

by: Caoimhin Laochdha @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 01:35:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This seems... (4.00 / 1)

true to me:

The point is, like today, prior to the Depression, large corporate/moneyed interests "regulated" how the government acted.

as does this:

our out-of-control financial institutions are exercising excessive influence and control (regulation) over our government, our politicians, our media and our ability to affect political reform.

However, all that being said, I don't see how more government and more regulation necessarily solves the problem.  As the government gets more powerful, it raises the stakes of regulatory decisions, which gives corporate and moneyed interests even greater incentives to devote resources to buying influence in government.  

Look, I totally acknowledge the need for some increased regulation in certain specific areas.  But it also seems to me that people who argue for across the board increases in regulation and government size need to confront the issue of regulatory capture.  I just don't think that we know of an institutional structure capable of preventing it, and I see government and regulatory expansion potentially exacerbating the problem

upsetpatterns.wordpress.com

---

by: diggs @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 04:23:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You may be right (4.00 / 1)

Except that I've never heard of anyone arguing for "across the board increases in regulation and government size". Ever.

If you review the regulatory structures of the federal government now and compare it to thirty years ago you will see a dramatic reduction in regulation in many areas, starting with the conservative Carter administration, which deregulated airlines and trucking, inter alia, and right up to the present.  One of the clear causes of the 2008 collapse was the prohibition of any regulation of instruments like credit default swaps, which brought down AIG, and which was embodied in legislation pushed through by Phil Gramm back in 2000, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

Now that we've seen the results of underregulation, or of the insouciant attitude to risk that the Republicans have adopted, people are starting to talk about what new regulation is necessary, but nobody, literally nobody, is talking about heedlessly expanding regulation and government without any thought to the consequences, the way the Republicans did when they were slashing.

---

by: Jack McCullough @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 11:15:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Of course (4.00 / 1)

nobody is talking about "heedlessly expanding regulation and government without any thought to the consequences".  Perhaps what I initially wrote was worded a bit clumsily.  The post I was responding to, though, seemed to be talking about regulating away excessive corporate influence and control on our political system.  I think that this is really hard to do in a way that doesn't just make the problem worse, and I think more thought needs to be given to how we can avoid that likely consequence.

upsetpatterns.wordpress.com

---

by: diggs @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 21:03:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My Dad and His Brother (4.00 / 1)

Were both put to work digging ditches along roadsides under that program.  It kept food on the table. Their mom had died in childbirth (most likely sue to malnutrition), and their dad was a low-wage factory worker. My Dad eventually became a Rhodes Scholar and physicist, and his brother became a VP in a large multinational corporation whose name you would definitely recognize.

You can have as many economic engines as you want, but without the wheels on which everything rolls, the car isn't going very far. We're the wheels.

Supporting the "little" people is the fastest way to create economic recovery, and a sure way to create the next generation of innovators and leaders for the industries of the future.

When the economy hits the next hiccup (and it's likely to be a doozy, between California - the 5th largest economy in the world - going bankrupt, and the next wave of mortgage resets - which dwarfs the sub-prime debacle), we will need orders of magnitude more projects that simply put people to work.

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

---

by: mataliandy @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 00:34:08 AM UTC

Due, not sue (0.00 / 0)

Amazing how one can miss spelling errors, even if one reads the preview. Oh well....

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

---

by: mataliandy @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 00:35:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thank you (4.00 / 1)

for those comments.

Supporting the "little" people is the fastest way to create economic recovery, and a sure way to create the next generation of innovators and leaders for the industries of the future.

When the economy hits the next hiccup (and it's likely to be a doozy, between California - the 5th largest economy in the world - going bankrupt, and the next wave of mortgage resets - which dwarfs the sub-prime debacle), we will need orders of magnitude more projects that simply put people to work

 So true.

sláinte,
cl

-- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

---

by: Caoimhin Laochdha @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 00:28:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where at the pics? (4.00 / 2)

Almost as much as the event itself, lots of us look forward to the post-Summit photos.  Did JD give anyone the skeptical eye?

I couldn't come -- I spent the afternoon shining up my biz plan for a Monday deadline.

Nate

Nate Freeman

Northfield, VT

natefreeman@gmail.com

---

by: mydog @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 21:20:26 PM UTC

And you were missed (0.00 / 0)

I threw this post up hoping folks would treat it as a Hamburger Summit open thread and post pictures/video/drawings/salacious rumors etc.

Unfortunately, I spent the better part of the picnic chasing kids/climbing trees/&enjoying Maggie's Most.Excellent.Burgers.

I'l post a couple of sub par pictures eventually, but hopefully someone who has a few good shots will toss them into this thread or update my post w/visual aids.

sláinte,
cl

-- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

---

by: Caoimhin Laochdha @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 00:27:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]