I work with cooperatives, and associations, my experience with them unfortnately is that they often sound a lot better on paper than they function in reality. It is hard workt to work together, especially when you have a multicultural setting with very different views as to what can be considered as acceptable rules. As a Swiss I have a very strong “need” for order, clear and equitable rules, timeliness, efficiency, (these are enourmously helpful characteristics in a capitalistic society) however many cultures have very different views on these topics. I have travelled and worked a bit around the world, and I have become convinced that no one has the right to impose their values on another, at the same time though, not all values are equally contributing to the betterment of society, or the individual for that matter. How do you reconcile this?

In a diverse society, as unfair as it may appear, capitalism (defining quality of life in terms of the things we own) that allows each individual to make their own choices and live with their consequences, seems the most suitable. It does not promote equality and it favors individuals and groups who already have a headstart in life, intelligent, wealthy, healthy, physically talented, etc.. and they almost always will keep remaining at the top echelons. They can afford to make mistakes, the headstart if they manage to tap into it, will always make them rise back up to the top. Given this fact, there is no doubt that in order to keep society functionning, some redistributive systems need to be in place to keep a certain homegenity and maintain peace. But at the same time these redistributive systems cannot go on taking from one group to give to the other, there have to be incentives, as well as measures to provide equal access to make sure that everybody is properly motivated to make it on their own. Otherwise surely dissent will form. The proper application of this redistributive system though is very complicated, and hugely expensive. Where systems seem most effective in keeping the balance between those that really need assistance and those that simply take advantage, the administration of the system typically becomes more expensive than the actual amount of resources transferred. And that too is a problem.

Truly I have no solution, all I can say is that ultimatley the greatest contributor to our own happiness (which might be quite different in definition for each of us) seems to be ourseleves, especially in the developed world. Our ability to make our own choices and willingness to live with the consequences of these choices then might be the definition of happiness. It would seem that life inherently is unfair from the begining, all we have really is ourselves to make it as good as gets for ourselves.

The house “ownership” didn’t benefit all classes because a mortgage is NOT home ownership. It is housing INDEBTEDNESS and the bank still owns the home. And please lets not talk about the risk of divorce for a home debtor. This is not a benefit to all classes especially when this debt is acquire with falling real wages.

Housing indebtedness is extremely expensive but it is all about the “American Dream”. The desire to having a home is very strong and what needs to occur is a rethinking of housing. Perhaps cooperative housing or co-housing or low-cost public housing. Also why is rent not tax deductible? Clearly rents is needed to provide shelter and yet there is no deductions or subsidies for paying rent.

There need to be a whole rethinking of housing.

I forgot I am going to tell my kids to do the same thing as me. They already have a first on there house and they need to get a second. I will tell them to always buy new never used. This Christmas max out there cards and then get another job that’s two jobs. Take my Grandson out of school heck he is six to watch the animals as they work. I am pulling for you. Now here is the big one to make friends with some rich people to get on the list. What list? From what I understand the entire State of Colorado will be ringed in barb wire and only people on the list can get in. That list. Like James Hansen said think of this as kind of a war. I am pulling for Wall Street and Banks maybe the people on the hill will come to there senses and pass this bill. I am pulling for them and will do my part think of this as a kind of war.

A good book called the list. A little on the lines of Atlas Shrugged anybody like to help me write it. Think of it as a kind of war.

Daniel – you have nailed it with regard to options, but missed the lesson. Yes, disintegration is the alternative (and may occur even with the bailout), but that isn’t necessarily a BAD thing. Yes, people will suffer. But, hey, the poor are already the poor. The real hurt comes to the new poor. And most of us are deadly afraid that we’ll be among them.

But here’s the real issue – why do we consider the loss of our material comfort to be such a horrendous hurt? Are we really that shallow? Or are there other things that make life worth living? Just maybe, the collapse of this wealth worshiping economy will be the best thing that ever happened to us, bringing focus back to aspects of life that truly are important.

While I find the Democratic opposition to this government-sponsored highway robbery somwhat less than inspiring, the actual vote tally HARDLY justifies any claim that the bill’s demise was “overwhelmingly” a Republican affair. Moreover, the *95* Democratic Reps [vis-a-vis 133 Republicans] who voted against that corporate giveaway can scarcely be considered a mere “handful”!

Shall we get our facts straight here?? This was clearly a BI-partisan — albeit frighteningly MARGINAL — rejection of that hasty “Chicken Little” plan. And despite Madame Pelosi’s typically quisling support for the Bush Reich, the House Democrats contributed significantly to that defeat:

“House Rejects $700 Billion Rescue Plan”
[AP; 29/09/08]
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20895.htm

‘ The U.S. House of Representatives on Monday defeated a $700 billion emergency rescue package, ignoring urgent pleas from President Bush and bipartisan congressional leaders to quickly bail out the staggering financial industry.

‘ The measure failed on a vote of 205 to 228. Voting against the measure were 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans. …’

So, to help me understand the banking system a bitg better, it’s kinda like feeding fish to 5,000 people using only 1 fish. That has only been done once before in history. They said The Beatles were bigger than Jesus, but do the bankers think they are too?!

By the way, Mike, I love your last paragraph with the canoe and brandy analagy. But do you seriously think the bankers will do the sweaty work of paddling? Chuck an outboard on the canoe and guzzle some more fossil fuels whilst sipping the brandy. There. I’m thinkin like a banker already……….

Three years ago I was doing warehouse work that paid £7.20/hr – and that was not exceptional. Today that same work pays between £5.80 and £6.20/hr – and that is not exceptional.

Meanwhile house prices were rising at something like 25%/yr.

How did the financial geniuses who run our economies think that people would be able to pay increasing housing costs with decreasing wages?

Get ready as it looks like mankind is about to be elevated like it or not.

I am sorry but coming from Europe, easy access to credit in the US provides for fantastic opportunities, but if one borrows only to blow it on consumption then of course one eventually ends up poorer, but that really is an individual choice. For anyone who can manage his cravings and use the borrowed money in smart investments this place still offers incomparable opportunities.

Now of course Wall Street greed and creative repackaging into new assets ignoring the fact that housing like any asset could eventually loose value played a big role too. But the fact that while it went on it benefitted many people at various levels of the economy makes a bail out almost a public good issue. What are the options anyway, let everything disintegrate. Disintegration will go well beyond the United States, in a largely globalized world and millions of people, in fact most of them poor will be suffering first and most.

In the 1930’s it eventually led to WWII, with fascists grabbing power in the countries most affected. Given how unstable the world is, a scenario with WWIII is definitely not beyond my imagination’s grasp, and such a war in the nuclear age would in all likelihood be far worse than what we have seen so far.

A study by Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research found that destruction of the Amazon had increased 228% in August compared with the same month a year ago. Guardian uk

It’s no big deal who needs rainforests anyway. We need to pass this bailout of 700 billion it’s good for the country and listen to your leaders they are watching out for you and I will vote McCain Palin as they just seem smart and I must say some of you who write for DV how can I say this seem unamerican. Watch Foxnews for a week or so and maybe you will see the light. Hannity is very good and very smart. Watch c-span and the leaders in action and just maybe you will change your evil way’s. Very good music while watching the senate not some of that stuff I’ll bet you people listen to. Did anybody see the President talk this morning he is looking out for all of us and just gives me a feeling of confidence. I hope what I just wrote will help you all in the future.

McCain supports the bill for the same reason he supported Charles Keating. As Michael Kenny suggest, McCain is a business republican rather than an ideological republican. This is the split. For example Christopher Shays (R) defied his Connecticut constituency and voted for the measure. If you take a look at the voted based on the congressional districts (the NY Times website has an excellent map of the votes by district) you’ll see that the northeast contingency supported the measure. In other words the monied regions supported the measure. The areas that were against the bill was mainly the Midwest so called “middle America” who’ve taken the brunt of de-industrialization.

This bill and the vote was all about CLASS and where was the “Left”? It took primarily the ideological Right to stop this awful bill.

This aspect was mention briefly today on DemocracyNow! If that was the case it was brilliant politics. But I still have doubt that a bailout is needed. What was mentioned on DemocracyNow is that the bill was rushed and the newer 110 page bill was essentially a longer version of Paulson’s original 3-page bill.

Clearly the media — who is owned by the very wealthy and wants a bailout bill — did not hide their anger at the Republicans and especially McCain who antics seemed to backfire.

Clearly what ever plan emerges needs to really infuse money at the bottom of the economy rather than the top. I am totally against raising the FDIC insurance cap to $250,000. That and deregulation is how the S&L crisis happened in the late 1980′s. If the banks know that the government will insure up to $250,000 in deposit it will allow more bank to take unnecessary risk with bank funds. IMO the insurance cap should be lowered back to $40,000 which existed before they raised the cap to $100,000. The average bank balance for most American is about $2500.00

In fact lowering the insurance would help to spread that money into more banks and even credit unions.

What we are seeing right now is the creation of mega-banks. What ever happened to enforcing Sherman Anti-Trust? My preference is seeing a restoration of U.S. Post Office accounts that existed prior to Eisenhower and a restoration of the stock transaction tax that existed up until 1966.

The Black in black Monday seems to be the junior senator from Illinois!

Also I recently heard that the Cynthia McKinney campaign is running out of money and do not have enough funds to send here to Washington DC to appear on an NPR program. This is clearly representative of the disarray of the Green Party and why there needs to be more scrutiny about the why the Left is in such a sorry state.