In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/10293
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
janeeyre 10/03/2009 12:56 PM Report
Type below on 'named,'but just also saying that if the US doesn't join the rest of the enlightened nations on health care/welfare state status they will become a banana republic in 80 years. Wake up guys.
janeeyre 10/03/2009 12:52 PM Report
To the ignorant writer below nammed 'Charlize,' I shall not allow your ignorant naivete to disturb me. Read some books, keep trucking -you're sad. Also, is it hard to hear the truth of two avatars on the show? You're a waste of energy -just read some books.
Ricardo_Amaral 05/15/2009 06:44 AM Report
Reply to Charlizecourriers
You will enjoy reading this thread posted on the Elite Trader Economics Forum. My screen name on that forum is SouthAmerica.
We covered a lot of ground on that thread from budget deficits, US GDP, defense spending, welfare/entitlements, and the reason why we need immediately a new system of national health care that cover the entire US population.
U.S. Economy – Budget Deficits – GDP and Defense Spending
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=163665
.
charlizecourriers 05/14/2009 06:03 PM Report
C Peete pose more meaningless questions to more meaningless liberals. See the giggling girl flutter her eyes and look to the old grey cliche maker declare it is all about 'larger' lives. And now for the numbers. Obama won by less than 3 percent. That means it will take about one and a half percent change to destroy the 'landslide' of left fantasies and rosey fussing about the new politics. The Obama strategy(a carryover from Bush) is very simple-spend what it takes to avoid any failures. That means borrow without limit-just a continuation of the old syndrome that got us here-a homeopathic politics for the 21st century.Yes comrade bankers! Let the bootstraps of the world pull the US out of this self inflicted mess. Otherwise all our liberal friends will have to admit the bottom line truth: they want things that they don't have to pay for-that's why a Democrat president and congress are agreeable to ultra lefties. Buy now-pay later. Of course C.Peete Rose has always been a public employee funded by charitable donations-sort of like campaign contributions-there are no limits to liberal truth. Or leftwing blindspots-you mean somebody has to pay for this? A private corporation funded by the American people...Now I see-and indispensable,too.
bjt 05/14/2009 08:14 AM Report
I am fully in line with thinking the same way JMM is. Well, perhaps not exactly, but I wonder in the same thread of thought, why transportation isn't considered a necessity in America. Why are some people left without adequate transportation and by that I mean particularly, women with chilren who have doctors appointments, dental appointments, school conferences, etc. and they lack adequate means to get their children there. Oh right. They don't have those appointments anyway because they know they can't get their children there, let alone during an emergency so they have to call 911 for that.
And why is it that a person in America can work 40 hours a week but not make enough to sustain him/herself with a good vehicle and live in a clean, safe place of adequate size? Why are some workers who work 40-80 hrs a week spending 1 million dollars on a 40th birtday party for their wife? Huge difference a few extra hours make. Yes, I understand there are more responsibilities in the second job, if you remember who I am talking about, yet hard work is still hard work and should result in the ability to sustain oneself.
So, my question is....why bail out the car makers by giving them money? Why not take that money allocated to the car manufacturers and buy everyone in America a good car. The car factories stay open, the workers keep their jobs and pensions, and people have safe, reliable transportation.
LOL...I think this is what we would call "thinking outside of the box," but it does have a solution in it, so thank you JMM for bringing this up.
JMM 05/14/2009 01:17 AM Report
Thank you for having Naomi Klein on again. I was wondering what her thoughts were on the present crisis. And congrats, Naomi for winning the Warwick Prize for Writing for your book The Shock Doctrine.
I’m glad you asked your guests about ideas on an improved economic system. Having lived in the US, Canada, and the UK, I’m all for universal healthcare ... I know the personal difference, and I look forward to the day when Americans get to see what they’ve been missing. As for this housing crisis, here’s a twist: I would love to see politicians take advantage of the current situation by making it a human right for all citizens to own adequate shelter (why pay someone else’s mortgage?) and food. How is that for a minimum standard in the richest country on the planet? And about this about usury and credit ... why not pay every worker enough so that they can afford the essentials plus a few perks? With one job. Then you solve those problems, don’t you?
Ah ... but who is going to pay those workers these days? If there is a fortune in private hands, and the cash isn’t going to go back into the markets, why aren’t they investing in cities and towns? I’ve always thought it would be interesting to see how much progress philanthropic dollars can achieve in global places of need. It would be of equal interest to see how much good investors can do by helping out cities and towns and neighborhoods. This town is supported by John Doe ... do his investments produce the level of visible results that Jane Smith is getting in a similar town? Something like a win-win situation. Is anyone else thinking like this?
JohnSteinsvold 05/13/2009 09:53 PM Report
An Alternative to Capitalism?
The following link, takes you to a "utopian" article, entitled "Home of the Brave?" which I wrote and appeared in the Athenaeum Library of Philosophy:
http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/steinsvold.htm
John Steinsvold
guitarsandmore760 05/13/2009 08:20 PM Report
Please write to your representative today and ask to make a new requirement of all lending institutions. All new loans must be accompanied by some sort of green renewable energy products.
Home loans must include solar, wind, or geothermal whether it is a new home or pre-owned.
Commercial real estate must be accompanied by a renewable energy product.
Let us take control of the banks and make them do it our way.
esantoro 05/13/2009 06:57 PM Report
Welcome back to Journalism, Charlie.
Citizen_Coya 05/13/2009 02:17 PM Report
William Greider's comments were a breath of fresh air in this stagnant political & economic climate! Warren is very smart but her participation in the farce is troubling. There should be governmental resignations en masse in protest at the throw-yet-more-taxpayer-money-at-the problem "solution."
Unes 05/13/2009 01:54 AM Report
I enjoyed Charlie Rose program on Monday night 5/12/09. This was an excellent program, all three guests talked in a straight language which made sense for the public.
Thank you Mr. Rose for bringing Naomi Klein back, and thank you for not interrupting her when she was trying to make a point!
Christopher 05/13/2009 12:43 AM Report
Naomi is so sharp on her economic analysis, it is not even funny. What is so awful about the public sector doing public sector things? I get so annoyed by Right wing hysterics that rant that if the government performs the functions that other western nations perform, it is socialism. As if the Right knows better than everyone else. The Right have gone so far right that in America that when a centrist policy is proposed (remember Obama’s policy is essentially centrist, to the right actually in any other Western country), they lose their mind.
Naomi Klein’s analysis of the election is dead on. And so is her analysis of how the banks influence capital hill. She was more eloquent than Greider. She is a great guest who should be on more often.
hrc 05/12/2009 09:32 PM Report
I too am stunned with the cabinet appointments, but less concerned after the interview with a focused Geithner. If only you could restore the banking regulations with a presidential decree, that would cure some systemic blues and we could move on. My thanks to all the fine guests lately and of course to our most gracious host.
AntonGrambihler 05/12/2009 05:12 PM Report
The books that need to be written are:
The Foreign and Economic policies
of
The United States before the FED
and
The Foreign and Economic policies
of
The United States after the FED.
tartufe 05/12/2009 02:54 PM Report
Posting behind REMant is always somewhat problematical (for me). As I don't know what Progressivism is so anything behind such a label is spoon-fed but probably undigested.
Are central banks ipso facto joined at the hip with easy money for instance?
Do agree too easy money happened with Henry Paulson with his three-page legal heist of the treasury. In fact I would love to be taken to court for libel for saying that. Attempts at proving it in a public forum might start some correctives that are going to be averted with the resulting moral hazard a certainty. The children at the healm love the excitement (the endorphin rush of a taxpayer insured billion here, a billion there) of scamming the system through jiggering predatory laws through the venal pols in government.
Jail time a la Madoff is overdue for too many at the top in both finance and government. Starting with Paulson, Bernanke, Rubin, Summers, and their elected counterparts.
That wont happen of course, but is why no system will ever work (under any label: capitalism, socialism, communism, totalitarianism) when corruption of the government is as easy as ours has become. When statesmnship is defined by getting re-elected at all costs, the remaining business is subverted to whoredom, run by the oligarch's lobbying pimps.
tartufe 05/12/2009 02:06 PM Report
HALLELUJAH!! Charlie finally had some credible guests regarding the financial bull shit we’re in.
Naomi was spot on re Obama’s over exultation by the masses. His acceptance of Geithner’s and Summer’s save-the-big-banks policy is wrong - and in my view he’s impotent and beholden because they bought him with campaign financing.
The line of the night was by Naomi: Let the police protect the bankers, and let Obama protect us from the bankers. Followed closely by Greider’s, let the culprits fail and the remaining banks would pick up the slack, paraphrasing quite a bit.
Well, that aint goin to happen, but it was nice to have it put in words.
Shock Doctrine’s a great read.
Charlie looked bummed out at the end. He damn near lurched at Naomi, as she wasn’t spewing the accepted orthodoxy - particularly of Charlie’s recent feckless lackeys. He (Charlie) deserves kudos for having these two guests as I’m sure they were against his natural (media driven?) orthodoxy.
REMant 05/12/2009 12:51 PM Report
The problem with Progressivism is that it embraced not only the idea of social security, etc, BUT ALSO, the idea of central banking and easy money. While I respect Greider (I have never read Klien and likely won't until she reaches my age, by which time it won't matter) I think they are quite wrong to continue in this vein and blame the free mkt for everything. The problem is with Progressive permissiveness and primitivism, which always blames stuff on someone else. And I would argue that at every crisis it is Progressivism, not classical liberalism, that has gotten stronger, and debilitated the country. More of the same will undoubtedly have the same effect. I would even go so far as to say that I don't think you could have either consumer surplus or imperialism without it. Eliminate the props for moral hazard and you will restore morality, not by passing silly laws about interest rates, which could then very well reduce themselves to zero. What are "mistakes-were-made" Bernanke's actions, but against usury? In fine, the Progressive desire is not to change the system, but only distribute the product of it differently, which, because it doesn't pay any attention to questions of productivity is self-defeating. I think they would be very surprised to find that Messrs Summers, Geithner and Bernanke all think themselves one with them. Now that IS paradoxical.
Ricardo_Amaral 05/12/2009 12:42 PM Report
Last night’s show with Naomi Klein and William Greider was excellent. Great show Charlie.
Ms. Klein hit the nail right on the head when she suggested Professor Joseph Stiglitz should be the Treasury Secretary.
Joseph Stiglitz is among a hand full of economists that I respect his opinions.
In November 2008 I started a thread on the Elite Trader Forum about
Barack Obama’s New Economic Team
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=146345
I was hoping that Tim Geithner’s nomination would be rejected. And I said: In case Tim Geithner confirmation is rejected to be the next US Treasury Secretary then I would suggest that they consider replacing him with Stephen Roach.
Mr. Roach is a first-rate economist and he is an expert about China.
But Mr. Stiglitz would be a great choice as well to replace Tim Geithner before the entire safety nets of the US economy are completely destroyed.
.