"
If there’s one lesson to the financial crisis that we should learn, it’s that the real value created by banks from esoterically-valued securities who’s value rely on revenue streams from a credit/consumption/debt-based economy is negligible, while the risks are not.
The paternalistic government philosophy of central planning wed to protected industries that finance the plan have created a dangerous bi-partisan economic fabric that distorts incentives, concentrates wealth to favored groups and interests, and disperses wealth inequitably. This creates an interesting solution set to our problems, one that unfortunately entangles, and is guided by the still rigid interests of the perpetrators -more moral hazards are created and thus the fabric becomes ultimately weaker.
It’s not that I disagree with Obama’s policies specifically, I disagree with a broader line of Keynesian economic consensus think that has basically been unchallenged from a policy perspective. This is not because it won’t work, it’s what the people in charge, those that finance the operation, and massage its outcomes do not want. They do not want their benefits to be more inline with empiricism, because empiricism has shown that there are structural problems that should cause us to re-think the very way things operate from a fundamental level, the whole paradigm - fractional reserve banking, debt & credit, fiat money, central banking, the federal reserve, arguments are moving by observable evidence to and from different sides on many complicated financial topics by a variety of more fringe economic-thinkers. Real change would change the power and wealth structure as it should, but power and wealth are very sticky things and are hesitant to move.
"