Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Fear and Loathing

  1. #1

    Default Fear and Loathing

    Nothing to fear but fear itself? I enjoyed this article until it cut itself short in the last few paragraphs. Maybe the author had an editor who reminded him of our short attention spans, and maybe some of you stopped reading half-way through?

    Anyway.....he compared this to the American psyche, but now it seems to be a global phenomenon. Most of our news is first world or related to PIIGS, but third world nations (aka "emerging markets") face the same types of skepticism or fears. Regardless of our histories, government structures, ethnic backgrounds.....we have a New World Order that encompasses the Whole Planet. There is no hiding, no ostrich option; we are all connected now.

    Now what?

    Reasons, Rule and Riots: Our Societal Panic
    David Cay Johnston | Dec. 20, 2010 11:57 AM EST
    On the surface, what's going on with tax policy in Washington right now seems crazy. A Democratic president whose enemies call him a socialist makes a deal with Republicans that sells out both his party and the very tax promises that won him the election, while Republicans leaders who say that debt is our overwhelming domestic problem insist on borrowing tens of billions of dollars to give tax savings to the richest among us. The polls, at the same time, show the public overwhelmingly favors ending tax cuts for high earners.

    What we are witnessing, however, is much more profound than political, economic, or fiscal insanity. And it goes much deeper than disputes over whether extending temporary tax cuts for two years and long-term jobless benefits for 13 months is politically or economically smart. Those are mere manifestations of a much more pervasive problem.

    America is in the grip of a full-blown societal panic. Crazy, irrational, contradictory ideas about tax policy are just the most obvious symptom.

    Societal panics occur when the expectations and rules everyone has been accustomed to living under no longer work. They occur when some new force changes the rules of the game -- a force that may be easy to identify or invisible, but whose effects are far-reaching and unstoppable.

    Sometimes that force comes from nature, sometimes from a discovery, sometimes from inventions of the human mind. But in every case throughout history, that force, like the waters pouring over Niagara Falls, cannot be stopped, although sometimes it can harnessed.

    Because no one knows quite what to do when the old ways stop working, panic sets in, replacing reason. Crazy responses spread until an idea or a leader emerges, a new way to make sense of the change. The new leader is often the one who persuades people that it is better to live by new rules.

    Humans have experienced societal panics time and time again. Sometimes they end in tragedy, sometimes in triumph. And those unexpected accidents of history often play a huge role in the outcome.

    Consider what happened to the Greeks 2,700 years ago. Greek settlers in Lydia, what is now the Mediterranean coast of Turkey, found a mine rich with electrum, a naturally occurring alloy of gold and silver. This find resulted in the invention of coinage, an invention so revolutionary that it launched the ancient Greeks into a societal panic that lasted two centuries, but at its end gave us two of the most powerful, intertwined, and enduring principles of Western Civilization -- the moral basis for progressive taxation and democracy.

    America was in the grip of a societal panic from the end of the Civil War until 1893, an era historians call the Gilded Age, but that could just as easily be called the Agrarian Death or the Industrial Triumph as America the land of yeoman farmers became America the land of industrial might. It was an era of turmoil and conflict -- gilded mansion ceilings and a famous speech about oppressive debt and a gold cross; the invention of the electric light and violent night-time attacks on workers seeking more pay; and our first encounter with a politician who lost the popular vote but became president anyway.

    Our current societal panic began almost four decades ago, when the economic glow created by emerging from World War II with half the world's industrial capacity wore off and President Nixon went to Beijing, opening the door to the transfer of that manufacturing capacity to China.

    The long-term effects of this, and the faux "free trade" policies adopted at the behest of our financier class, took time to affect society, just as the invention of coinage did not instantly disrupt ancient Greek social and commercial relations.

    Our panic turned into wildly unthinking behavior at the end of the last century, with taxes as the first sign that reason was giving way to belief, that dogma was trumping empirical evidence.

    But while the symptoms we see are crazy tax policies, crazy borrowing, and neglect of the commonwealth property and policies that are the foundation for private wealth creation, our panic is about something much deeper.

    Our societal panic is about what we as a nation fear almost as much as death itself -- the end of American abundance, the death of the idea that each generation would do better than the last, the end of the notion that everyone who works hard and plays by the rules will at least prosper in the sense of having a roof over their heads and enough to eat. Our societal panic is about a new world of mind-numbing complexity where speculation with algorithms and borrowed money pays more in a day than thoughtful investment may return in a lifetime, where jobs pay less tomorrow than yesterday, and where loyalty is something we associate with frequent flier programs rather than careers.

    Societal panics are like riots, something I found myself in the middle of a number of times in the turbulence of the '60s and '70s. When crowds turn violent, with steel pipes intended to support saplings pulled from the ground as weapons, when lines of police swing batons at anyone in their way, when rocks and bottles rain down from rooftops through a fog of tear gas, the natural instinct is to join the wildness, to become mindless because nothing makes sense but escaping the fear, the terror, that envelops you.

    Keeping your head, becoming coldly rational, makes it possible to sidestep the cudgels and spot the street furniture that can provide a canopy from the hail of deadly missiles launched from the rooftops.

    But even if you keep your head, in riots there is no place for rational discussion. Fear is all consuming. As the novelist Frank Herbert taught us in Dune, his tale of an entire universe in panic and a new leader who ended the panic, fear is the mind killer.

    The fear of what the new American economy means is killing reasoned debate about taxes, tax policy, and how to distribute the burdens of making our great nation function.

    Fear keeps us from talking about how to create an economy in which prosperity is widespread and how using taxes can make us richer by insuring the efficient and bountiful supply of the common goods and services that modern economies require: education, research, infrastructure, and universal healthcare as a service, not a profit-making insurance product.

    While societal panics are difficult to appreciate when you are in them, once they have passed they are easy to identify, along with their causes and how the problem that brought on the panic was resolved.

    Often the disruptive force is unknown to a society, like the microbes that brought the Black Death to Europe, bequeathing us the murals of the Danse Macabre, featuring skeletons holding hands with kings and popes. Sometimes the force is obvious, as when locking up all the land in perpetual trusts (which many states now allow) brought worsening poverty to 18th century France until Dr. Guillotine's cutting edge severed the problem at the head.

    Sometimes the disruptive force is obvious, as when the Lydians discovered electrum. The gold and silver alloy could be pressed into tokens that, in time, evolved into coins of different value.

    The jingling of coins is so common today we think nothing of them. At their invention, however, the ease of engaging in transactions and building up a store of cash challenged ancient societies, which were built more on cooperative relationships than any medium of exchange.

    It took the Greeks two centuries to work through the issues that began in Lydia, what we now call the Age of Tyrants. Their panic eventually produced the plays of Aristophanes and in time gave birth to two of the greatest ideas of Western Civilization, ideas intertwined to this day -- the moral basis of progressive taxation and the various forms of self-rule we call democracy.

    But before the classical age in Greece there was draconian law, named for the dictator Draco, who decreed death for all crimes because, he reportedly said, it was the appropriate sentence for petty theft and he could not think of a harsher punishment for worse offenses.

    The Greeks endured these harsh laws for four decades, a reminder of how long people will endure harsh and unjust policies. Then came Solon, who repealed Draco's harsh laws, except for death as punishment for murder. Solon also forgave all debts, which enriched those who had borrowed heavily at the expense of the lenders and, for a time, made credit hard to get for poor farmers.

    Eventually the crisis created by coinage helped the Greeks work through the idea of what freedom meant, how laws could define conduct, and how economic power was separate from political power. This last insight resulted in the Greeks' reasoning that it was only because of Athens -- its laws, its courts, its military -- that one could legitimately acquire riches and have them protected, for in his natural state man was in a jungle, a war of one against all in which riches came by luck or plunder and could be taken away by brute force.

    That insight resulted in the first progressive taxation. The moral basis for this was the principle that the greater the wealth Athens made possible, the greater the burden the wealthy must bear to sustain Athens, which in turn protected that wealth through laws and its military. Intertwined with that was the birth of the ancient world's first recorded example of self-rule through one-man, one-vote for Athenian citizens.

    Societal panics, the ancient Athenians showed us, can have remarkably positive outcomes, although getting there can take a long time when much damage is done to society.

    Our own nation was in a panic from the end of the Civil War until the economic collapse of 1893, the Gilded Age. After its collapse the underlying conditions changed little until one of those unexpected twists of history changed everything. In September 1901 a disgruntled office-seeker shot President William McKinley near Buffalo, N.Y. The new president was Theodore Roosevelt, who gave substance to the Progressive Era, an unexpected development because the Wall Street interests who detested Roosevelt as governor of New York had made him vice president to make sure he had no power to threaten their interests.

    Imagine an America today without the many changes wrought by Roosevelt, or that he encouraged, in his assault on what he called "malefactors of wealth."

    In our panic today we are bedeviled by tax policy and an economy built on rules that no longer work.

    The 20th century, what some historians will look back on as the American Century, prospered under a national, industrial-wage economy, flush with high-paying jobs and tax rules that discouraged withdrawals from operating businesses. Taxing wages was a smart way to finance government because wages were rising. But since 1973, with some brief exceptions, this has not been true for the vast majority, whose average income in 2008 was less than 1 percent greater than in 1980, while incomes at the top soared, spurred in part by rules that encourage withdrawals of capital from business for unproductive consumption because of extremely low tax rates.

    The 21st century is an era of a global, digital, and asset economy with rules that favor the free flow of capital over labor, which is brutally suppressed in China and legally suppressed in America through anti-union laws, lack of enforcement of wage laws, and the dampening effects of a growing reserve army of the unemployed.

    America's current societal panic is not going away soon. Tens of millions of people are out of work and tens of millions more fear their next paycheck could be their last. The temporary Bush-era tax cuts will not end next month, even though the huge deficits run up since 1980 hover over us like dark clouds of debt that could drop enough worthless government bonds to drown us all.

    Yet we must deal with the circumstances we have created for ourselves. The price of self-governance and its freedoms is making wise choices and electing wise leaders or suffering the consequences.

    The adoption of misguided economic policies, the election of politicians unwilling to be disciplined in opening the public purse, and the artificial deadlines imposed on us by the legislative gamesmanship used in enacting the 2001 and 2003 tax cut laws, together with our faux free trade policies, have put us in a deep hole.

    In clawing our way back we must keep in mind that those Bush tax cuts were not tax cuts at all but simply loans against a future which has now arrived in giant waves of red ink.

    There is talk, by very thoughtful people, that we can never recover from this hole, that our fate is sealed, and that we will descend into a future worse than the past within living memory. I believe we can go on to a richer future, but it will take a leader who synthesizes an understanding of how the old rules must be discarded and new ones adopted that flow from the changes in the world economy.

    Before we get there things may get worse, much worse, as the Greek experience with Draco and his draconian laws should remind us. But we will never get on a path to sound tax policy, policy that flows from the new economic order instead of against it, until enough of us stand back from the riotous conditions and find a place where rational debate about taxes can grow into popular understanding.

    While I know what he intends by using the term "panic", I'm not convinced that's the right term. Some of us have been following "trends" for years, and feeling disturbed or worried. At first, it was called skepticism. Then, it was called frantic (or fanaticism), as in Chicken Little the Sky is Falling!

    "Panic" only works for those who haven't been paying attention....or those too young to know that the collective WE should've known better.



    EDIT to add the link http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.ns...2?OpenDocument

    I tried to do this before the thread posted, but it didn't seem to work.
    Last edited by GGT; 12-21-2010 at 09:46 PM.

  2. #2
    That's some real right wing NWO stuff lying beneath the surface of that but...no, I don't see the need for panic. We need to get our national fiscal house in order. Big time. And when that's done, and we haven't killed our economic competitiveness in the process, things will look very rosy. There's a lot more to a society than just tax policy.

    Almost as important, I think it's important to think that this kind of stumbling around is good. It's natural. It's the product of humans in an open society.

    GLOBAL VIEW | DECEMBER 21, 2010

    China and the Next American Century

    Beijing's Politburo has nothing on Mark Zuckerberg.
    By BRET STEPHENS

    Not least among the better surprises of 2010 was that Liu Xiaobo won the Nobel Peace Prize and Mark Zuckerberg was Time's Person of the Year—two rare good picks, and two that tell us something about our time.

    "Our time" is supposed to be one of China's unstoppable rise and America's inevitable decline. Don't believe it. History is littered with the wreckage of regimes that thought they could create "consensus" by suffocating dissent and steal the intellectual innovation they could not generate on their own. China's bid to do just that merely compounds political error with historical ignorance.

    By contrast, in 2010 the U.S. did what free societies always do best: It blundered royally, it came to grips with the scale of the blunder, and now it's getting round to fixing it. That's business in America, and that's politics. For every Arnold Schwarzenegger there's a Chris Christie; for every Rick Wagoner there's an Alan Mulally; for every runaway Congress there's a tea party. (And for every tea party there's a Chris Coons and Lisa Murkowski.) In a trial-and-error system, the self-correcting mechanisms are built in.

    This is not an incidental point. In the contest between free and authoritarian societies, the claims of the former typically rest on a moral foundation: Free societies are respecters of ordinary human decencies; they do not put cruelty in the service of efficiency and ambition.

    All true. But the claims of decency would not last long if they consistently yielded mediocre results, just as the rigors of a cruel system would not be long refused if they yielded outstanding ones. Nations, like people, will suffer for greatness.

    But greatness is not what cruel systems mainly yield. Stupidity is. Both to the right and to the left, among those who admire the Chinese system and those who fear it, a habit has developed of treating the rulers in Beijing as philosopher kings whose time horizons span decades while ours span days. Thus Irwin Stelzer in the current Weekly Standard: "The Chinese are playing grandmaster chess against an amateur America that can't see beyond the second move."

    Oh, right, chess: a great Soviet specialty. Also, a useless political metaphor, since the one thing you can't do is gain pieces you didn't have from the beginning. Where was Facebook and its $40 billion of value when the Chinese Politburo wrote its last five-year plan?

    There is a view about China that its dearth of innovators—no Mark Zuckerbergs, no Nobel Prizes in science, minimal investment in original research, their most original political thinker (Mr. Liu) imprisoned—is irrelevant to its future because it can always reverse-engineer whatever technologies it wants, ban those it doesn't, and let others bear the costs of research and development. So Russians are incensed that the Chinese have cloned their Su-27 jet fighter, and the Japanese are incensed that the Chinese have copy-catted their bullet trains. Ditto for computer software, cars, cell phones and all the other intellectual property that foreign companies are obliged to disclose as the price of doing business in China.

    Yet for all this you cannot plagiarize your way to pre- eminence. People start to notice, and to care. Neither can you innovate successfully if the prevailing political ethos is to insist on conformity of thought or a direction for development. In the late 1950s China decided to overtake the U.K. in steel production. Some 40 million Chinese were killed in pursuit of an idiotic goal irrelevant to China's eventual development.

    Now the Chinese are placing big bets on wind farms and solar panels. Go to it, fellas! If they think the future is what a certain New York Times columnist says it is, the rest of us can rest easy.

    As for the U.S., Americans understand that innovation is inherently serendipitous. That was true of Facebook, just as it was true of Apple, Google and Microsoft. These four companies have a combined market valuation that approaches $700 billion. That alone is 12% of Chinese GDP.

    Americans also understand that what's true of technology and business is also true of politics. Nancy Pelosi's Congress decided to legislate in defiance of the polls, and of political gravity. Now they're measuring their escape velocity in the number of ruined political careers. Whether the 112th Congress does any better remains to be seen. But it will probably be more obedient to the American people's sense of its own self- interest. Which, as the old Mandarin proverb has it, is like a tree that, because it bends to the wind, is not broken by it. And its roots grow deep.

    And as for China? What Winston Churchill once wrote about a certain German admiral seems apposite here: "He was like a cut flower in a vase; fair to see, yet bound to die, and to die very soon if the water was not constantly renewed."

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...184760212.html

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Dread
    Almost as important, I think it's important to think that this kind of stumbling around is good. It's natural. It's the product of humans in an open society.
    Wasn't that Castro's criticism of capitalism? That it's a system constantly wobbling from one disaster to the next.
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  4. #4
    Seems reasonable enough. But to some extent isn't that humanity as well?

  5. #5
    I wouldn't call the monetary destruction of pensioners, retirees, or workers trying to save for retirement as --- normal stumbling around in an open society. Let alone a healthy "faith in freee markets". And it's not normal to make lame excuses about pushing monumental debt forward onto future generations, the same people who are going to be "taking care of us".

    Almost as important, I think it's important to think that this kind of stumbling around is good. It's natural. It's the product of humans in an open society.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    Wasn't that Castro's criticism of capitalism? That it's a system constantly wobbling from one disaster to the next.
    Every system moves from disaster to disaster. Change happens, which means shit happens. That's why I never particularly care how elegant a system is, or how well it might work under ideal conditions, I care about how robust it is and how it functions when/after something goes wrong.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Every system moves from disaster to disaster. Change happens, which means shit happens. That's why I never particularly care how elegant a system is, or how well it might work under ideal conditions, I care about how robust it is and how it functions when/after something goes wrong.
    Sounds reasonable and rational at face value. What's your rating of the US system, then?


    EDIT: Come to think of it, based on your attitude, the Netherlands would have acted like New Orleans: building crappy levees or dams based on the last disaster, and never really looking forward. Yet, the Dutch hired the best and brightest, and paid through the nose for a below-sea-level system that actually worked to protect their citizens. And they're constantly testing, upgrading and tweaking. What's the US doing? Changing chairs on the boat deck. Oh, unless it's the west coast. Then building societies on earthquake fault lines, or on the edge of beaches and cliffs, managing mud slides or wild fires......all that garners millions upon millions of dollars, and special attention.
    Last edited by GGT; 12-21-2010 at 11:19 PM.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    ...but...no, I don't see the need for panic. We need to get our national fiscal house in order. Big time.
    So when do you plan on paying your share (currently $126,000)? Or are you counting on your children to pay it for you?
    Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
    If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Being View Post
    So when do you plan on paying your share (currently $126,000)? Or are you counting on your children to pay it for you?
    I plan on having 10 kids and no job. Both I and my kids will receive checks from the government and eventually I'll siphon off enough money to pay my share.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Every system moves from disaster to disaster. Change happens, which means shit happens. That's why I never particularly care how elegant a system is, or how well it might work under ideal conditions, I care about how robust it is and how it functions when/after something goes wrong.
    Yeah. Didn't you guys have tent ghettoes full of unemployed people during the hey-day of this particular recession?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dread
    Seems reasonable enough. But to some extent isn't that humanity as well?
    I don't know.
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •