Blame the bailouts on Mr. Rogers???
Reported by Chrish - December 19, 2008 -
Guest blogged by Dan
I miss the "Outrageous Quote of the Week". I admit that I was never certain if an honest, but truly ignorant quote, was more outrageous than one that was just mean-spirited. Elizabeth MacDonald lets us have both. Ignorant and Mean-spirited.
Blame the Bailouts on Mister Rogers? at Emac’s Stock Watch | Fox Business
The entire article is awash in sanctimony, mis-statements of facts, and enough mean-spiritedness to bounce the author to the lead in the "Grinch of the Year" award.
Mister Fred Rogers, the children’s TV star, who, beginning in 1968, started every show telling us that we were “special” just the way we were.
When we weren’t.
As I fondly remember Mr. Rogers, his message was that each of us is a unique individual, with our own unique skills & talents. That makes us special. This is the children's version of 'I'm Okay, You're Okay. Or in deference & respect to Mr. Rogers' deeply held religious beliefs, "Jesus Loves the Little Children" (All the little children of the World)
"When we weren't" says Ms. Mac Donald. Weren't what? Unique? Special? Okay? Jesus DOESN'T love the little children?
Blame all of those preening child-rearing experts who encouraged an excruciatingly costly culture of entitlement, a culture of narcissism, of excessive self-righteous self-indulgence, where generations grew up believing they were entitled to follow their own codes of conduct, a chronic “me first, I get what’s mine first” attitude–to the point where one survey shows one in three teenagers expect to be famous.
Narcissistic, self-righteous, self-indulgent? When did Bill O'Riley enter the conversation? But more importantly, aren't the teenage years when the entire future opens up and anything seems possible? Now I don't know where we made the jump from Mr. Rogers' show for children to teenagers, but don't all little boys want to grow up to be astronauts? Isn't childhood the time for limitless dreams? Did little Elizabeth dream of one day being a Pundit? And isn't life the pursuit of those dreams?
Better yet, blame the bailouts on everyone who forgot the most important part of the Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood show, a willful ignorance that has led to a mass dereliction of civic duty, of civic vision–Rogers’ emphasis on “neighborhood.”
Didn't a former First Lady write a book entitled, "It Takes a Village"? Wasn't she mocked & criticized by Fox Punditry over it? We have had Presidents in favor of "Small Government" (yeah, small enough to fit into the womb of every woman in America) and "Getting the Government off the backs of the People". Aren't those same Presidents today praised by Fox? "Trickle Down Economics" is certainly not the economic philosophy of a communal or neighborhood centered group.
A mindset which has resulted in more than half of the country’s annual $14 tn in GDP, $7.8 tn, a quantum leap in fiscal debt, now being committed to bail out the economy.
Once again, pay no attention to the Pundit's hands. Hocus-Pocus. The National debt of $7.8 tn is now a bail out debt. Where did the National Debt come from? Fox will tell you that it is reckless Democrat welfare spending. But the facts disagree, both in percentages, and dollar figures, most of the deficits were spent by Republicans and mostly for wars or military spending. Regan & Bush Jr. being the major offenders. In fact the Iraq war has been funded mostly "off the books" so the true impact on the deficit is hard to measure. The bail out figure I've heard is $700m. Big difference.
A crisis fueled by a housing finance system, distorted for seven decades by the government, which has now gone begging for a government bailout.
However, nowhere does Cox admit that the SEC “utterly failed” in its oversight of the credit rating agencies, who rubberstamped triple-A ratings on mortgage-backed paper at the root of the crisis, notes Barry Ritholz of the Big Picture, or the ramifications regarding how the SEC relaxed its Wall Street capital oversight rules in 2004, and how that subsequently resulted in firms levering up 40-to-1, debt versus assets, starting in 2004.
There are several intervening paragraphs between these two quotes. But which is it? Has the housing finance system been in crisis since President Truman, or was it triggered in 2004 when the Republicans allowed the SEC to relax it's oversight?
Meanwhile, in the runup of the credit bubble from 2002 to 2007, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Bros. and Bear Stearns had paid an estimated total of $312 bn in compensation and benefits to its employees, compensation largely based on false profits.
Keep you're eye on the Pundit's hand. Is she including retirement & health insurance in the total here? Fox loves doing that to the United Auto Workers to make it seem that they are extravagantly paid. But There is little doubt that the truly obscene compensation packages of many corporate officers is something that needs to be addressed. But this wasn't a problem when the top tax bracket was 90%. But Republicans have reduced the top bracket, reduced the Capital Gains (Unearned Income) taxes, and tried to eliminate the Inheritance taxes. Obviously feeling that every American ought to be able to inherit his $50 million tax free.
*In Bakersfield, California, a Mexican strawberry picker with an income of $14,000 and no English was lent every penny he needed to buy a house for $720,000.
So the Mexican with no English (how is that relevant?) is at fault for applying for a loan? Or does the fault lie with the Mortgage Originator who charged a fee, the Financial Institution that made the loan and charged multiple fees, or the Rating Company who claimed that loan was a AAA investment when it sold and charges a fee? And assuming the guy did default on his loan, he has lost everything, the lenders still have their fees. Talk about blaming the victim.
Fannie and Freddie have been allowed to expand their mismanaged multi-trillion dollar portfolios, along with $200 bn in taxpayer money to cover their losses.
Fannie & Freddie were formed to encourage home ownership by guaranteeing payment of mortgage loans. This is bad because? President Bush Jr. refers to the "Ownership Society". It's now somehow morally wrong now to want to own a home? It's morally wrong to want the best house in the nicest neighborhood possible? It's morally wrong to dream of a better life for oneself & one's children"? In the movie, "It's a Wonderful Life" George Bailey wants people to own their own homes. Does Elizabeth Mac Donald really want us all to live in "Pottervilles"?
Guest blogged by Dan
