Charlie Rose

lawforce  08/11/2011 03:40 AM Report

Sir or Madam "Govaffco":

Your moniker apparently denotes a curiously inexplicable affection for the current Administration of Our Government. One can surmise from your comments that you hold blithe & blind allegiance to the current regime, while you regrettably fail either analytically or factually to address the sum & substance of the very specific points enumerated in Paragraphs 4 & 5 of the 8/9/11 comments.

As for reading about the decline of American Capitalism vis-a-vis the last 3 decades of Profits without Production (read: JOBS), please procure a copy of S. Melman's, Profits Without Production (Knopf 1983), study his profoundly accurate, indeed almost prophetic observations--now nearly 3 decades old--then kindly reassess or answer your own question, "have you heard/read something clear on these that the rest of us haven't?"

Quite frankly, Mr. Melman's insights have been made or shared by many others over the last 30 years. Sadly, neither our leaders (D or R) in Washington nor the majority of America's corporate and/or financial managers have preserved and protected America's Birthright, to wit, our once indomitable ability to create, manufature and produce great value in the world market.

You can thank Wall Street, in particular, Goldman Sachs et al., the single greatest cancer that has metastasized in the Body Politic of the United States since 1929, for capital flowing myopically to American Enterprise based on bloating the Bottom Line, rather than building or regenerating strong communities by increasing the job growth that would ensure a strong middle class and sufficient tax base to fund the American Empire while still caring for its at-risk citizens.

You might enjoy Matt Taibbi's "The Great American Bubble Machine," Rolling Stone [http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405] ("From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression -- and they're about to do it again").

BTW, my party affiliation has been Republican, since I first cast a ballot in 1972, but I vote with my mind and conscience as an American first, last and foremost. You may wish to consider such options, as well!

NeilMacCallister  08/10/2011 11:20 PM Report

"govaffco"???????????

What the heck kind of "kk-hood" is THAT?????

***

"Workers (..and non-workers) of the world unite!!!!

"We will grab our destiny!!!!

(.."If we can get rid of those darn jews!!!!)

"Workers of the world unite!!!!!

"..and take the reigns from everyone who knows what the hell they are doing!!!!

"Workers of the world UNITE!!!!

"..And let us all die in FLAMING GLORY, ..and fun!"

govaffco  08/10/2011 01:40 PM Report

lawforce - I can't count the number of times the last few days that I heard economists, markets experts, etc. comment on CNBC, Bloomberg, CNN and elsewhere: "Who knows why the markets react the way they do?" with vague guesses about contagion, emotion, fears that expand because of unrelated news, and so forth. I think your pinning Monday's market results on the President's remarks is without foundation.

And while I sympathize with your free-floating anxieties, none of your suggested *improvements* to Rose's list of questions would elicit what both sides of the aisle have conceded does NOT exist -- ready (or guaranteed) solutions to jobs creation, to generating demand, to the EZ's problems, to congressional brinksmanship, to the simultaneous need for long-term pain and short-term stimulus. Or have you heard/read something clear on these that the rest of us haven't?

doodah  08/10/2011 07:47 AM Report

... if the parties could get together and simplify the tax codes and close the poopholes, that would go a long way to helping small businesses with carrying the weight of the world. .. but would hurt accountants and attorneys. :( which would be too terrible. And not likely to happen, because politics is All About Attorneys. ..and as long as the economy suffers, nobody notices them, and what they do (the ones not in politics, Yet).

doodah  08/10/2011 06:56 AM Report

... basically, all the Tea Party is, is the the small business community trying to get the same deal that Wall Street got; which I don't blame them. But it really is just more bullshit and is not going 'create more demand'. In fact, will more likely dampen it.

doodah  08/10/2011 06:33 AM Report

... I guess I just don't see how things would/could be any different with a republican politician as president. George W. not only initiated the massive SocialistEletist bailout and was quite poised to run up the debt and destroy the deficit to save Hank Paulson's 'buddys', But he (for 8 years) PRESIDED over the biggest financial scam in history (which culminated AND Required (as we know now) More than $800 Billion Dollars SocialistEletist heist of working Americans to get the economy and JOBS back!

Something that your 'Beloved' Tea Party FAILS to understand. Cutting taxes and pretending to worry about the debt and deficit will not improve your life as a Republican Bum, Neil.

doodah  08/10/2011 06:12 AM Report

Glad you're feeling better, Neil. Obama brought you 'hope' like he promised he would. How many other politicians do you know of that ACTUALLY deliver on their promises?

And thanks he gets, is more disrespect.

NeilMacCallister  08/09/2011 09:01 PM Report

President Obama is wrong.

S&P did not downgrade America's credit rating because "they saw wrangling in the Congress", ..

They downgraded America's credit rating because we have just raised America's "IOU balance" above America's yearly GDP earnings!

...with no end in sight!!!!!

***

Why do we Americans waste $93 million dollars a year on Mr. Lew's "Office of Management and Budget", when it is screamingly obvious that we are delivered absolutely zero "management" or "budget"??

Does that OMB exist merely to provide its 500 jobs for party-loyal Democrats???

(..at $93 million dollars!!!!!!)

Sheeesh!!!

***

If Barack Obama was the Principal of a neighborhood elementary school, ..he would be found "failing" and evicted. All his many staffers would be fired, and a more proven talent roster would be hired.

***

The countdown to 2012 continues!

...I just hope we last that long!!!

SharkswithfrikingLazers  08/09/2011 06:00 PM Report

Austan Goolsbee is right: "Can't we wait on the things that we're going to yell at each other about and start on the things that we agree on?"

free trade agreement

bipartisan infrastructure bank

patent reform to try to encourage innovation

At least show that Washington can do something, that they can agree on something--FOR THE SAKE OF THE ECONOMY!!!

robdverity  08/09/2011 05:12 PM Report

Well said lawforce. The Obama continued proliferation of the plutocracy strangling the economics of our world is anathema. When laws and legislation are for sale nothing will work ultimately.

And noone has gone to jail. Sicko cultures get what they deserve. A decade of war financing leaves the dregs of a decade of war - and their financing.

charlizecourriers  08/09/2011 04:55 PM Report

Another installment of the Good Democrats Club, funded by the U.S. taxpayer.

lawforce  08/09/2011 02:49 PM Report

I appreciate and rely on your interviews to provide incisive discussions by eminently qualified guests on leading financial and political topics of the day, as well as informative entertainment from the Arts.

However, tonight's interview with Mr. Jack Lew, Office of Management and Budget Director, flew in the face of sound intelligence, objective analysis, and any modicum of public policy dialogue value on the precipitous events of the last few weeks on Wall Street, in the financial markets around the World, and amidst the seats of power in Washington. Understandably, Mr. Lew is a sycophant for the Obama Administration; but allowing him to go unfettered by any "hard questions," rather than the leading, "slow-pitch" questions posed by Mr. Rose Monday evening, was extraordinarily disappointing--something like watching softball pitches when the real life game (America's future) requires sizzling overhand fastballs and an occasional slider. For example:

If the President has the moral, policy and political upper hands that Mr. Lew both expressly and impliedly proffered, why did the NYSE plummet another 200 points even as Mr. Obama was speaking to the Nation and the World earlier yesterday? Why did Mr. Rose fail to mention, let alone press, Mr. Lew on this obvious market repudiation of the President and his Administration's economic and financial policies?

In fact, the Chief Executive's short-cited handling of the U.S. debt ceiling impasse, his willingness to punt (delay = uncertainty = tumultuous markets) rather than run the ball straight down the throats of the Tea Party (or run the the 14th Amendment "trick play"), the Administration's inability to reign in Defense or Domestic spending, and most significantly, its failure (credit Mr. "Goldman Sachs" Geithner) to direct a sizable portion of TARP to the small and mid-sized businesses of America--THE historical job engine of our economic system--rather than to the financial mavens who created both the 2001 dot.com and 2008 securitized residential mortgage debacles, taken together have led to the increasing impotence of the U.S. in the now fully multinational World Economy. S&P simply rated the obvious: our country and Government are so broken that our "full faith and credit" simply no longer remain "full" or credible. The flight to Treasuries on Monday only shows that no other "safe havens" yet offer the capacity or the long-term prospects (YET) to provide rationale alternatives during tempestuous securities markets. Our Treasuries currently are akin to dancing with the least ugly girl at the high school dance until a prettier girl arrives on the scene, as history shows time and time again will surely occur as nations and civilizations do their dance. Rather than giving Mr. Lew a "free ride," why did Mr. Rose not press him on at least a few of the foregoing issues? Indeed, CR suffered a truly regrettable journalistic lapse this evening.

Prior guests on CR in the last week alone highlighted the lack of demand in the U.S. Economy due to systemic (versus cyclical) unemployment that has resulted from over three decades of America's Corporate Managers continuing to sell (read: offshore) our Birthright--jobs that could have been created by reinvestment in America, which jobs should, and could, have resulted from even-handed roles being played by the operational and financial managers rather than relying myopically on financial gurus (read: fast-buck artists), who earned paper profits (read: huge personal bonuses) in a manner that has led to many U.S. companies making Profits without Production throughout many sectors of the U.S. Economy. See S. Melman, Profits Without Production (Knopf 1983). Had Mr. Rose simply taken the insights proffered by his guests a few nights earlier, he could have pressed Mr. Lew on the Administration's plans to develop real, long-term, systemic solutions to job and demand creation, the lack of which lie at the root of our economic malaise. That Mr. Rose and the CR staff performed so dismally with Mr. Lew in my opinion seriously undermines the CR program as a useful informational conduit during these most trying of times as our Body Politic suffers an acute but hopefully not fatal illness.

Playing the set-up man for Obama & Co. should be left to much lesser lights in the national media. Such a turn of events on CR deeply saddens me, since I have relied on Mr. Rose throwing fastball strikes along with some clever curve balls--softball is simply too boring!

Ellen_Dibble  08/09/2011 11:07 AM Report

I hope someone snags that quote from Mr. Lew at the end where he modestly says of Boehner's blaming Obama for demanding "revenues" right on the cusp of a major agreement and ceasing to return phone calls from the president: "Of course there was another side to that." Then quietly he explained exactly where the negotiations were at, why it was not the president wrecking his own deal, but, apparently, the Republican caucus in the House refusing to go along, not unless Obama agreed to unwind certain crucial parts of the health care legislation that we spent last summer getting all hot about, nationwide. I'll try to put it here, but it's worth listening to: The president told Boehner you could have a smaller debt reduction deal with this and that, or you could have a larger deal with more "give" from the Democrats in the House and the Senate, and with more "give" from the Republicans in the House and the Senate. And the answer was just no. No call-back, no further talk in that vein.

REMant  08/09/2011 10:54 AM Report

The idea that S&P downgraded US debt because of political wrangling alone is ridiculous, tho it is good copy for the liberal media. I'm happy to see the more knowledgeable ppl here know better. But it is clear that ppl still rank Treasuries highly, and have thruout this period as Mr Lew said. I spent time yesterday being ridiculed for saying the same thing on several websites, however. Keynesians like Baker and Stiglitz are in high dudgeon about austerity, too.

The "party" line is to argue that everything was fine until the debt limit issue came up, and even so the issue could have been avoided if the GOP had agreed to raise taxes. That might have helped the bond issue, but not necessarily the economy, and I would detach the latter from any consideration of the markets, except that much of the market has depended on the return of cheap money and bubblenomics, which we can see in many places, for examples, Brazil, China and Israel. The economic issue is bigger and the Republicans were right to confront it even tangentially. The plain fact is that the spending and the quantitative easing didn't provide anything except hot air, and while some think that is enough, riots and suffering around the world argue differently. One does have to ask where money is coming from.

Tocqueville noted the egalitarian strain in Americans. Based on envy, he did not, however, think it a very good thing.

The president is now looking forward to recovering a majority in the next election. I'm afraid I think he was during the debt discussions as well. But I think that idea is about as sensible as expecting to pack the Supreme Ct. The only hope I think the Dems have is if the GOP nominates people who look more spendthrift than they.