Charlie Rose

Gelles  01/12/2012 01:22 PM Report

"It is now the time for such narrowness to be abandoned."

[change to last sentence second paragraph immediately below]

Gelles  01/12/2012 01:17 PM Report

I have asked for focus on leadership to bring to exports and trade the common sense reforms needed to grow national economies to support global full employment at decent living standards.

Such reforms will change corporatism from a means to concentrate wealth to a means to share wealth. It used to be fashionable to limit "share the wealth" to police-state socialist anti-individualist ideologies. The time for such narrowness to be abandoned.

We can share the global wealth with the globally located individuals who will be our good neighbors or our enemies. No one needs more enemies.

The reason to avoid sharing systems was that they did not work. Too much emphasis on sharing left enterprise too weak to get organized and led from nothingness to something grand and glorious.

This has not changed. But, in the course of growing older, enterprise has developed nations, cities, firms and individuals to the point where tenure can be granted to us all with respect to living standards supported by modern science.

We are discovering all we never knew about mass production and mass consumption. We have yet to discover how to reform finance and accounting in the interest of individual virtue and worth. This can and must be done. We have been our own enemies for far too long a time. Traffic engineers develop turning circles to improve intersections. Over- and under- passes may be better. Stop signs and lights seem primitive. What about moving production to individual consumers. Can we invent best ways to do the job and reap the rewards. Poverty is about the worst solution one can think of. Machines make it an obsolete model -- and the time to forbid it is right now.

Hate and its expression is lowest today when police prevent it. We do not want more police than work well with each other and with the public they protect. But we do not want too few. And we do not want too little training and expertise to characterize their work. We can afford extremely well trained and paid police. Machine production of what they consume makes this possible new as never before. Highly paid teachers in schools and virtual schools (reaching every home) are necessary. But highly paid good behavior police are even more necessary than specialists in law and language. Criminal conduct among our individuals and families prevents the advance of freedom and excellence we seek with higher learning. The art of early training of individuals to love their neighbor is an essential beginning if we are to correct the love of bad behavior that has us in its thrall.

This kind of reform is infinite in its descriptions. So I better quit. I do not mean to say there are no priorities to be observed. There are priorities and it is our job to set them -- open enough to be workable. They presently point to money reform so that we finesse the "tax you not me" conundrum. Tax nobody. Manage liquidity and pricing. Allow savings to awaken the miser in all of us. When we have poodles of wealth, even in the form of gold or money, we always want some more. Work that theme, until our capacity to make things does not make paupers of us all -- all but one percent of us, that is.

http://www.outputbasedmoney.info/.crs.htm

[Minor correction of post 11:44 below]

Safe from nuclear war, safe from economic domination BY one or more rival economic powers, safe from economic and environmental tragedies of our making or the intentions of fools and knaves abroad.

Gelles  01/12/2012 11:44 AM Report

REMant remarks that Charlie will be hard put to keep his night show current when he is compelled to keep his new morning show VERY CURRENT.

This is true; and we, here in this commentary archive, remain handicapped by non-currency of our input: it's Thursday, January 12. Last night I listened to the forthcoming 2012 election and John Lewis Gaddis'biography of George F. Kennan.

Now Gaddis is the Robert A. Lovett Professor of Military and Naval History at Yale University. And it is military, naval, 'war-satellite and rocketry', and 'cyberspace and non lethal weapons' history that ought to be our topic tonight.

George Kennan was the scholar who read the future at mid 20th Century and helped prevent the nuclear WW III we feared -- which might have ended life on Earth.

This 2012 election is not about jobs and international trade alone. It is about GLOBAL LEADERSHIP to continue to avoid nuclear war and its potential consequences.

In commenting on this show of January 9, and the primary in New Hampshire, President Obama focused on the American economy, its middle class and his responsibility to keep Americans safe.

Safe from nuclear war, safe from economic domination one or more rival economic powers, safe from economic and environmental tragedies of our making or the intentions of fools and knaves abroad.

We have been looking at INEQUALITY from the perspective of fairness to children and the society they find and leave to their heirs when they die. Fairness is the least of our concerns. Life and liberty cannot last through a nuclear war or global reversal of fortune that free trade is leading us to. We must switch to intelligent trade and diplomacy and intelligent preparation of peace protected by strength of which the post WW II period has informed us.

Economic and military power go hand in hand. Consumption in balance with production and need must replace commercial monetary profit -- if we are to survive the future in sight.

Money, words and weapons are our tools. They are not the same as they have been for thousands of years. They are all new. Technology and science have made them new. The Manhattan Project has opened the door to the future now surrounding us.

We need new information agencies similar to the NSA to know our logistical economy and our own and our enemies minds as well as we are learning about communications, biology, and materials. The goal of small government and cheaper exports is idiotic in the face of future threats.

Gaddis said we have no George Kennan's in our stable of leading thinkers. We do have them. We better put them on these shows. Obama does not seem to miss them. He seems not even to know what to ask them. And all his competitors are more in the dark than he is. Only Jon Huntsman seems to have encountered any knowledge of them.

ReidTeacher  01/11/2012 11:31 AM Report

Looks like he was at the same bar at the next broadcast too.

tabs  01/10/2012 06:49 PM Report

The following was sent to CNBC on 1/6/12

As we all know Romney and his minions dropped a house full of negative ads on Newt Gingrich before the Iowa Caucus.

Last night Gingrich made an appearance on Hannity on the FAUX. He had a twinkle in his eyes that one could just tell that he was sharpening his knife. Newt don't get mad he gets even, as such he is now on a mission to make sure that Romney does not get what he wants the most in life and that is the Republican nomination for President. To which Newt said, "That a Massachusetts Moderate will not be the Republican candidate for President."

Newt is not only just smart he is very sophisticated. If one were Romney one would do well to read up on Mark Anthony's "lend me your ears my fellow Romans...Brutus is an honorable man" speech to the Romans in Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar. For Newt knows how one word here and one word there can change the meaning of a sentence into a pejorative all the while seeming innocuous. One thinks that the term "Massachusetts Moderate" is going to become dirty words. It is very likely that Romney will not even know what hit him and one would not miss the coming debates for love nor money.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  01/10/2012 06:20 PM Report

Bain Capital is already Mitt's liability. At Bain Capital it was cutting jobs, more jobs and even more jobs to collecting HUGE management fees to selling off companies that were so weak they went into bankruptcy. It is not a model that can be extrapolated to the Federal Government. The Colbert Report does a GREAT segment on this.

As for the Olympics, was it Authoritarian or Dictatorial Leadership?

SharkswithfrikingLazers  01/10/2012 06:13 PM Report

I am glad you opened it up Charlie and also included other news.

It was good to hear Al's comment about Harry Reid to give us perspective. (Harry probably needs a mood enhancer or to join the 400% increase in those on anti-depressants http://healthland.time.com/2011/10/20/what-does-a-400-increase-in-antidepressant-prescribing-really-m ean/.)

With Bill Daley leaving a year early, and at the end of the month, and the House dug in against almost everything from the White House, this looks like a "nothing from government year". Perhaps the private sector will finally get off that $2 trillion it has been sitting on and we will see something in 2012. Haven't we been told time and time again that they can't move because of so much uncertainty?

Well there is now certainty and it is gridlock for 2012--so giddy up. Let the flood gates of investment flow.

tabs  01/10/2012 04:56 PM Report

Mr Dowd is very accurate in his appraisals. When one says WH staffers does one mean Valerie Jarret and Michell Obama? The battle for BO ear has been won by BO's old and trusted political family from Chicago. As such their ideological perspective will be for EVERMORE the rhetorical line coming from this Presidency. Let one make no mistake about this move, this is a retreat to a Bunker Mentality as nothing else has worked for them. The only question that remains is how much deference does BO give to his Staffers when making decisions?

tabs  01/10/2012 03:36 PM Report

Ron Paul would be a text book candidate for 19Th Century American isolationism. One where there is a Super Power like Great Britain to carry the weight of Global Security. With a Global Economic Empire to maintain the United States is forced to maintain its world wide foreign and military presence or forfeit its standing as the leading power. Therefore Mr Ron Paul is out of touch with reality when it comes to Foreign and Military Policy.

mlsmith  01/10/2012 02:48 PM Report

to have Judd Gregg on the program, preaching the Romney way is to put on blinders, let's not forget he is the buy-low-sell-high mentality of corporate greed...fire the American worker to push up your balance sheet and then sell at a profit...Judd Gregg is only Romney's hench-man, speaking with a forked tongue, as he criticizes European social programs and accepts employment with that egocentric bastion of financial lies, Goldman Sachs.

REMant  01/10/2012 11:34 AM Report

I imagine Daley was brought in in the first place to get the president's office under control and improve its relations with conservatives, but it appears he was not adequately supported by his boss if that was the case, altho some think he simply had been away from Washington too long to have much weight or understand the change in temperament. He will tho remain Obama's campaign co-chair. Politico seems to analyze the situation well: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71254.html

I still think the reason most Democratic-leaning pundits believe Romney will be the nominee is because they think he should be the nominee, which, of course, is not exactly the way conservative Republicans see it.

I shouldn't be surprised ppl haven't considered Hunstman more seriously, but I am, nevertheless. The political process this year reminds one of Churchill's observation that Americans try everything else first. Of course, he is not in the same class as Paul as a libertarian, but he's in the same league, and I wouldn't call him just a technocrat as some have. He's for free trade and sound money and tax reform. And yet, unlike Paul, Wall St appears to love him. I don't particularly care for his domestic oil ideas, but I think he understands all the ramifications of energy policy, and there are few options. I am not fond of the Mormonism either, but again he's had considerable experience in other cultures and with other religions. Besides appearing broad-minded, he's broad-based, and has both a business and a government background, having served in four administrations, with nothing negative, and he undoubtedly has the most foreign policy experience of any of the candidates, and also been a two-term governor. Unlike legislators and ideologues, governors generally learn to curb their enthusiasms. He's young enough to run for president in four years or even in eight or twelve, and I can't think of anyone who better meets the needs of the Republican party.

I don't BTW see how Charlie is going to do live or even near live stuff at night and get up early enough to do the same at 8 a.m. on a daily basis.