Charlie Rose

finalfantasytown  05/03/2012 05:24 AM Report

Garden of democracy? What is that? The ancient dragon spirit guides America a way to Garden of democracy, whose land is called deleland. Don't you see the point: they want you extinct. The whole solar system is an information or intelligence store. Not just this planet in universe has intelligence. Too many have highly advanced intelligence. I think this topic in this interview is pessimistic and destructive in current situation.

Gelles  05/02/2012 11:07 PM Report

AT&T service is coming tomorrow to make this signal stronger. Hope they do.

Gelles  05/02/2012 10:59 PM Report

If Ben Bernanke will buy our Treasury paper, our government will be able to achieve full employment of labor and capital. If we do, we can balance output to need, money to output, and people to their democracy based on human rights and, outstanding engineering, sustained work, and good conduct.

We can close every jail and sentence felons to house arrest and ankle bracelets. Only the few who deserve Devils Island will have to serve time in that hell hole.

Every school can be a Garden of Eden where learning is the rule not the exception.

We can become the American Dream -- better than we ever were.

Cancel all taxes and run the economy on wealth versus mnore wealth. No one need be in debt. Everybody breathes air. Everybody can spend money. Its a matter of basing money on output of the things we buy -- not on debt!

The PREAMBLE can be the whole Constitution. All other detail can be reprogrammed as necessary and all systems simplified to be as intuitive as possible. No one is above the law. And no law is above the need to reform its text until it is readable and enforceable by reason of is obvious merits.

Call all this Utopia. But why prefer less?

Gelles  05/02/2012 10:36 PM Report

Austerity reduces DEMAND and does NOT increase SUPPLY.

Obviously if you NEED a job, income, home, and satisfaction of essential want, austerity is NOT for you!

So why not vote in your own and the NATIONAL and PUBLIC interest -- like the PREAMBLE promises we will do?

Tom Coburn writes of the DEBT BOMB. Debt is not a bomb. Timothy McVeigh made a BOMB. Alqueda made passenger planes into bombs! Debt is no more than a piece of paper with an IOU written on its face.

DEBT is for future payment if possible. If not, pay less. If necessary, pay nothing, at all.

Bombs are for keeps. Don't cry wolf and pretend to know. You don't know much if you think IOU's are the same as legal tender.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:50 PM Report

Fast talking market fundamentalists offer cliche's and utter lies instead of guns or

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:49 PM Report

Fast talking market fundamentalists offer cliche's and utter lies instead of guns or butter. We need butter on the table of workers and consumers to recover from the depression caused by bursting bubbles that unloosed debt and mass destruction of jobs and capital's value for cash or credit.

CR tried to inform him of the effect of austerity-recommended goals, cuts and theories. He would not listen. CR should have had Bernanke at the table to shut Coburn up or agree with him as the two of them resigned.

Obama and Romney are almost just as ignorant. Neither is willing to denounce austerity and unemployment for the cruel and inexcusable torture that they cause and essentially are in fact.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:48 PM Report

Fast talking market fundamentalists offer cliche's and utter lies inst

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:48 PM Report

Fast talking market fundamentalists offer cliche's and utter lies inst

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:47 PM Report

Fast talking market fundamentalists offer cliche's and utter lies instead of guns or butter. We need butter on the table of workers and consumers to recover from the depression caused by bursting bubbles that unloosed debt and mass destruction of jobs and capital's value for cash or credit.

CR tried to inform him of the effect of austerity-recommended goals, cuts and theories. He would not listen. CR should have had Bernanke at the table to shut Coburn up or agree with him as the two of them resigned.

Obama and Romney are almost just as ignorant. Neither is willing to denounce austerity and unemployment for the cruel and inexcusable torture that they cause and essentially are in fact.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:45 PM Report

Fast talking market fundamentalists offer cliche's and utter lies instead of guns or butter. We need butter on the table of workers and consumers to recover from the depression caused by bursting bubbles that unloosed debt and mass destruction of jobs and capital's value for cash or credit.

CR tried to inform him of the effect of austerity-recommended goals, cuts and theories. He would not listen. CR should have had Bernanke at the table to shut Coburn up or agree with him as the two of them resigned.

Obama and Romney are almost just as ignorant. Neither is willing to denounce austerity and unemployment for the cruel and inexcusable torture that they cause and essentially are in fact.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:34 PM Report

Coburn's archive page may not be ready for comment until tomorrow. So this page on Gardens of Democracy will have to serve instead.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:34 PM Report

Coburn's archive page may not be ready for comment until tomorrow. So this page on Gardens of Democracy will have to serve instead.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:34 PM Report

Coburn's archive page may not be ready for comment until tomorrow. So this page on Gardens of Democracy will have to serve instead.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:32 PM Report

Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican Senator and medical doctor knows no history, Keynesian economics on purpose, or money as the root of monetary systems of production, thinks he is qualified to run the country on the principle that markets know more than the prices they yield -- they know such prices solve all operational problems without any words or music.

Coburn spouts fast and furiously nothing but nonsense and prejudice against logistical science the realities of human want and how to work to satisfy it.

Gelles  05/02/2012 06:31 PM Report

Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican Senator and medical doctor knows no history, Keynesian economics on purpose, or money as the root of monetary systems of production, thinks he is qualified to run the country on the principle that markets know more than the prices they yield -- they know such prices solve all operational problems without any words or music.

Coburn spouts fast and furiously nothing but nonsense and prejudice against logistical science the realities of human want and how to work to satisfy it.

lnv  05/01/2012 02:18 PM Report

The comments and the show are miles apart. How rich was Steve Jobs before he became hugely successful? The metaphor of the garden overtaking the machine is all about turning away from Modernism (Le Corbusier: "The house as a Machine for Living"), and coming into a new way of understanding the complexities of social life.

On my first post here, a tip of the hat to the host. I've been a fan from the get-go. And have often suggested to others that watching this show for four years, and following up by reading the authors, should qualify one for a degree in the Liberal Arts.

Fantastic work, Mr. Charlie Rose. One in "The Great White North" says: Thank You.

Gelles  05/01/2012 01:28 PM Report

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborative_innovation_network

The above link to Wikipedia tells much the same story as my plea for a doctrine machine below. I just discovered it. I will try to work with it ASAP.

Gelles  05/01/2012 01:17 PM Report

The 20th Century was described as war between Democracy and Dictatorship by many on both sides who witnesses it and died to keep democracy alive.

Others saw it in Marxist language as a culmination of capitalist contradictions leading to something more advanced than colonialism and more united than irrational nationalism.

Still others saw it as a continuation of imperialism where one empire declined as another rose to power -- but in a scientific age where nuclear war would end all human folly.

Now we have heard Nick Hanauer and Eric Liu describe it as preparation for developing national garden states to replace the doctrines of laissez faire "numero uno". They want democracy to aim to improve the lot of all, not just the lot of the few who rule by hook and or crook and the ignorance of voters.

Abe Lincoln said GOD must have loved the poor, HE made so many of them. But that was the case long before hyper mass production.

IGNORANCE loves the poor, it makes them all today. Intelligence has the power and duty to end poverty overnight and make the best uses of inequality as there may be for it: inequality is the natural challenge nature created for man to tame. The virtuoso plays the music. Lesser skilled people sit and listen.

Yes we want the garden -- not a jungle everywhere and not a junk pile either. But replacing an ultra competitive culture with radically cooperative and collaborative systems that simultaneously do the work and respect individual human rights has been impossible in many times and places.

Today we have gardens in some cultures. And we have snake pits in others.

My hope lies in human inventiveness and its potential to reform institutions, like language, law and economics, until they work as well as our Defense Advanced Research Programs Agency (DARPA) and the National Security Agency (NSA), at least, for the latter, in its use of data systems to discover hard to find patterns.

I dream of a system of connecting individual ideas of how to govern a nation not by opinion polls that disclose our ignorance but by collaborative RESTATEMENTS of policy and purpose created in an "open wiki" with editors and writers whose job it is to RESTATE anonymously the policies and purposes that define political economy to present "schools of thought" that cover coherently all the ideas anyone and everyone want to volunteer -- again anonymously.

For every main entry, the public would be able to correct it, as with Wikipedia -- but here would be a powerful difference. The corrections NOT incorporated in the entries, the minority views, so to speak, would be in the public domain, along with the orthodox doctrine within a "school of thought", and available for copying and use by dissenting individuals.

There would be limits that reduced dissent from infinite to finite size. Conceivably, the published orthodoxy would stink and the undistributed dissent would be golden. But where such a bizarre result happened, it would be discovered and reversed over time.

Anyone for implementing this Open Doctrine Bank (or policy wiki) please comment. Books and Tweets and Faces in Face Book are not enough to create the Garden of Democracy waiting to be planted.

When the Krugman page opens up, this proposal may be contiued there.

Gelles  05/01/2012 06:47 AM Report

The authors make the rational economic arguments of Keynes -- that when SUPPLY does not create sufficient MONETIZED DEMAND, a nation, that prints its own money, can do it instead.

[above corrects par 5, below]

..... If it decides to risk some inflation, and to help create requisite demand, jobs and human happiness can be found -- after money is spent into circulation and liquidity is restored.

Gelles  05/01/2012 06:27 AM Report

Tonight, in San Diego County, CR interviewed Paul Krugman. It was about recovery, here and in Europe.

Gardens of Democracy were not compared to the jungles, plains and deserts we inhabited before fields and gardens were planted by their human users -- because they feed us, supply flowers for the rooms we've built in which to live, and kill the snakes where nature puts them.

Krugman wants sufficient DEMAND to be created -- via political action --- for SUPPLY to be profitable and people can breathe easy because their work is needed and the pay is good.

The team of writers, one rich the other thoughtful, have tried to explain to this nation (and the global audience whom they target,) why 99% of us have too much spending money and 1% have no where near enough.

They make the rational economic of Keynes that when SUPPLY does not create sufficient MONETIZED DEMAND, if a nation that prints its own money decides to risk some inflation, helps create requisite demand, jobs and human happiness can be theirs after money is spent into circulation and liquidity is restored,

These authors focus on tax burdens and a fair degree of inequality -- far less than we have now. They do not focus on government SPENDING of money backed by debt or money backed by output or a practical blend of both kinds of money.

REMant writes about specific political and historical periods and literatures that are not dispositive of issues surrounding inequality, technological drivers of industrial growth, or employment-interest-and-money (as Keynes explains them.) He insults the writers and with his pen proves his inadequacy as a critic of the garden theory of political economy we have before us.

Topazgirl (my favorite among us) sees the authors' concern for middle class survival and success as correct -- but their emphasis on practical ways to approach this concern as inadequate.

Charlie Rose did well, IMO, to interview the authors and so promote the book; but CR does not get it. Debt in relation to GDP is never significant. GDP in relation to need is all that counts. Debt is paper that responds to negotiation, reorganization, write down, serial bankruptcy, etc. Need is paramount and real; and if you can supply it with the use of debt-based or output-based money, your investment can be made as debt or equity and handled later to suit a variety of purposes.

Our nation, planet and people have severe problems. Let us solve them NOW. Jobs, CO2 pollution, corruption, war and terror, ignorance and meanness -- these need magic bullets we proved were within reach in WW II. We need to repeat, as peacetime variations on what we did, the miracles of production, now of safe fuel -- not planes, ships, guns and tanks, effective education, massive competent health care, etc., etc. Bring back wartime savings programs -- minimize taxes that separate people from love of government.

Go to sleep. Continue this tomorrow on Krugman's page.

topazgirl  04/29/2012 04:04 AM Report

fft: Excuse my bluntness, but WTF?!.. We are trying to discuss a serious issue here, and I have no idea what the h3ll you are talking about! Please stick to the topic at hand, or take this irrelevance elsewhere...

finalfantasytown  04/29/2012 12:40 AM Report

The art of Tornado drawing; one eye and one tooth of Graeae; finding Medusa; Medusa's beauty and her ability to turn human into stone; serpents' ability of narration is by translating energy/emotions into logic and do calculation to tell the possibility; why Athena holds her shield as a mirror to guide Persus so that he doesn't have to look at her directly?; I don't understand why Medusa was punished to be a monster after having sex with Poseidon. Isn't it right that human being need to liberate love?

Is it interesting to rebuild same things perfectly at same place after being destroyed by Tornado and see whether Tornado will redraw again? If it works, the problem of sustainable economy in China will be solved by manipulating this technology. No matter how many times tornadoes are repeating, their real estate will become stronger and stronger. Furthermore, Chinese continue play the role in contributing the blood money to the world economy. The most holy color of red is bloody red. They are real Jesus Christ.

topazgirl  04/28/2012 11:37 PM Report

...Ayn Rand and her sycophant Alan Greenspan were selfishly short-sighted! Capitalism, run amok, will undo us ALL!... If ANYONE deserves to be "rich", it is Warren Buffett....

....I'm done!.....

topazgirl  04/28/2012 11:22 PM Report

... I don't think I've EVER used so many CAPITALS and exclamation points in my life!!!!! But I am really, REALLY pi$$ed, right now!!!!!!!

topazgirl  04/28/2012 11:17 PM Report

Who is this book written for/to? If it to "us", then they are preaching to the choir! "Citizenship" is NOT a foreign word to "us"... "We" go to church, raise our families, pay our bills and taxes, donate our time and money to the Red Cross, Boy Scouts, food banks, etc. "We" go to work each day (if we can find a job!), and "we" do all we think a good citizen of the United States is supposed to do... This book is not about "us", it is about "them"! We are like the "Braceros" of the 70s, who tend their "gardens" and help feed "them", and when the season is over, and the Patrones have made their money off the sweat of our efforts and contributions, "we" are sent back to our squalid huts to eat our tortillas, and Top Ramen, and hotdogs and beans, and try to tend to our families as best "we" can.

So, NOW what?... "We" know "they" cannot create a middle-class... WE have already done that! And it worked for awhile... But money, and power, and influence stacked the deck against "us". We ALL know that the middle-class is the backbone and salvation of this Country... even "they" know that, but they don't care. They will get as much of what they want until they die; then, "who cares"!

And worst part... the WORST part (!), is that they have convinced half of "us" that we should be grateful to "them" (who are the "job-creators"), who allow us work. "We" need to cut them every kind of slack (and tax deduction!) so "we" can still feed our families with the paychecks they "supply" us...

Bull-$#!+...

One consolation: "We" may go under-water before "they" do, but down-with-the-ship they will eventually go ...And "we" are MUCH better at treading water than "they" are!

onevoice  04/28/2012 08:06 PM Report

Consumers are always there on different levels with different needs. But find, be able to create/make a unique product for specific needs of consumers and be able to survive of growing is not every one can do. Otherwise, anyone can be a successful entrepreneur. Of course, when an entrepreneur understands the importance of growing its consumer base by reasonable profit sharing with its employees and consumer makes him a better and smarter entrepreneur, but it is always true that entrepreneurs have been taking a very important leadership role in the creation of our jobs. Look at Apple as an example. Consumers were there and many cell phone makers there too. But only after Apple made its iphone that lead whole industry taking off and had it revolutionized.

TodSpence  04/28/2012 12:35 PM Report

WOW. Simply WOW. So many things wrong here with what these guys were saying its simply unbelievable. And is it just me or did Nick Hanauer come off as a total idiot? He repeated himself over and over again with out actually explaining anything.....usually the in depth explanation of your point and why it is your making it is the most important part......

SharkswithfrikingLazers  04/28/2012 01:40 AM Report

Yes, Charlie--good government. Not just the left/right frames.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  04/28/2012 01:37 AM Report

'Not a zero sum game. Not a fixed amount of prosperity.'

Oh, oh.

Someone doesn't understand oil and the hydrocarbon society we live in now and for decades. China has 300 million folks coming on line (adding to their middle class) and their oil thirst will be difficult to quench.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  04/28/2012 01:31 AM Report

'Trust—-the highest predictor of success and its eroding is a huge indicator.'

Well the federal representatives of we the people are only trusted by about 9 to 11% of these people.

So this predictor says success is not in our future and who can trust Wall Street with the lost decade, robbing shareholders via executive pay and crime with no punishment.

No trust, no more number one.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  04/28/2012 01:24 AM Report

'You are not stuck in traffic; you are traffic.'

Nope. Some idiot did not plan. There is not a way for all of us to use the transportation system because those who received building permits for new construction were able to build before the infrastructure was in place to handle the new load.

I am stuck in traffic--stupid government traffic that costs us billions and billions and billions--what the hec, trillions--of dollars in stupidity.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  04/28/2012 01:17 AM Report

'We are all better off when we are all better off.'

Except we all have egos and we want to be better than our neighbor, be it in school, in sports, in income, in living standards, in children (QUALITY here not quantity) . . .

So these two are much, much better off than me.

Please send me a check so we can all be much better off.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  04/28/2012 01:08 AM Report

We are told that our economy is not a machine but a garden.

If this be true would we have unemployment?

Nope, not true. The machine lays me off not the garden. Perhaps we should all learn to be gardeners (make our own pie so we don't have to get a piece of the pie) so then we won't have to "Rage Against The Machine."

JoeFriday  04/27/2012 07:56 PM Report

Bravo to Liu and Hanauer for injecting reality into the usual RightWing versus Extreme RightWing debate.

Of COURSE consumers, whose spending comprises 73% of the national economy, are the "job creators" in a DEMAND economy, which is why failed RightWing "supply-side" economics has been a dismal miserable failure every time it's been enacted.

Throwing money at the Rich & Corporate does not work, has never worked, will never work, economically. Not to mention that our greatest periods of prosperity in this country occurred when the top federal income tax brackets were 87% and even 91% (and those are marginal tax brackets, NOT percentages of one's income), or just after federal income taxes had been raised on the Rich & Corporate.

Yger  04/27/2012 04:26 PM Report

Brillian people, great ideas.

It's sad to see commenters resort to the same old. The "left" and the "right", it's the same game. Which means no hope for America.

EPatrickMosman  04/27/2012 04:04 PM Report

Messrs. Hanauer and Liu resort to economic and cosmic psychobabble to re-frame the old question

"which came first the chicken or the egg" with regards to the origin of job creation, ie, starting a company or consuming the finished product. Of course the hoary oft told tale of Henry Ford paying a higher wage to the workers so they could purchase the Ford Model T begs the issue of who started the company, created the jobs, hired the workers and decided on their pay was held of an an example of "what" in their economic 'soak the wealthy" order? Without Henry Ford taking the risk and financing the company there would have been no jobs or cars for other to purchase. That was and hopefully will still be the American way for creation of new companies, creating well paying jobs and creating new products for the ultimate consumers.

Neither of these gentlemen offered an example of the mass of consumers creating a new product or new jobs by some spontaneous desire to buy an unknown product. Until an entrepreneur has an idea or sees the need and develops a new product which if successful will create a demand and the potential for more jobs there is no demand.

Mr. Hanauer bragged on his eight figure income, his low percentage of taxes paid but following Warren Buffett's example, he pays only the legal minimum of taxes although he could write a check to the US Treasury for any amount that would salve his liberal conscience.

tabs  04/27/2012 03:47 PM Report

In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.

dcduring  04/27/2012 02:39 PM Report

I'm afraid that what these fellows have to say has the aroma of crackpotism. There is an element of a particularly naive form of Keynnesianism in their thinking. The form of Keynesianism is that form that only really works in a self-contained economy. When the US was on top of the world it could afford to focus on domestic consumption and view the leakage of economic stimulus to the rest of the world as a form of foreign aid, furthering our larger purpose. We are well past that point now. Now we need to think harder about global competitiveness.

Global competitiveness means focusing on production not consumption. I never cease to wonder that some of the same people who excoriate our consumer society rely on it (in the form of naive Keynesianism) in their political economic arguments.

The sectors that employ large numbers that are doing well without substantial federal subsidy now are energy where domestic production competes with expensive imports and agriculture because of high and growing export demand. Information technology is relatively stable and does not employ very many US blue-collar or lower-middle- and middle-class workers. In the recent past our best export industry was probably financial services, but the combination of poor corporate governance and the down phase of the usual cycle of credit, lately in the securitization and derivatives markets, coupled with the public scapegoating and regulatory over-reaction has put that industry out of the running for export success.

I haven't noticed that our economic leadership has been celebrating the industries that have been succeeding in world markets. Instead they favor those like autos that are unionized and which have been the targets of intervention or are a flavor of the decade (possibly last decade) like solar.

The emphasis on consumption will also lead us to a disastrous reliance on the "health" and "education" industries, which have the earmarks of the next bubble.

REMant  04/27/2012 12:39 PM Report

I was lying awake last night on my Pacific Feather Chinese down pillows, beneath my Pacific Feather Chinese down comforter thinking how nice it is to have your arguments taken up and then mangled by some writer. Easter weekend I looked a book called Currency Wars, which I could readily see had virtually plagiarized things I'd written about money here and superimposed them on what had clearly been written initially from a monetarist perspective, maintaining we needed both a gold standard and Ben Bernanke, on the belief, too, that markets don't clear of themselves.

I flatter myself that Mr Rose knows I've been making the argument here for something like five years that people must be able to afford what they make, that owners cannot do without workers, and that Social Darwinism is not Darwinian. But these ideas did not originate as the present authors would have it, with some sentimentalism or socialism, but simply because ppl eventually recognized their true interest and lived in accord with reason, as Mandeville argued. You can have disinterested benevolence, but it is still self-interest as long as we are men, and not neurotic. Self-interest is fundamental to Locke's critique of absolutism, as much as Mandeville's and Smith's critique of sentimentalism, and the Stoic philosophy from which it, and much of Western religious thought sprang, as well as, of course, to Cantillon's and Say's very republican ideas of equilibrium. And to quote John Adams two centuries ago: "I have always thought that Sir Isaac Newton and Mr. Locke, a hundred years ago, at least, had scientifically and demonstratively settled all questions of this kind."

At first I was thinking, in fact, they must have got their notion from those who've attacked such equilibrium economics as being too organic, or ecological, when it should be considered a machine, something with inputs and outputs, like Keynesianism. (Yes, there are those who have written just that.) Alas no, they've just gussied up the same old welfare captitalism with ideas of diversity and all that, even cribbing the book's title from a well-worn trope. But the reason we have the inequality we have is precisely because of transfer payments and money printing. And you can't go around taxing paper gains caused by the latter in order to fix the problem.

Aside from urging Americans to greater self-abnegation, they're pushing more government funding for education, on the theory that it is trickle-up economics, rather than what seems obviously to be trickle-down. But they've apparently never read anything on that subject as well, otherwise they'd know our educational system is about as efficient as our health care system.

And I'm positive they don't know any American history, nor certainly Tocqueville, much of whose Democracy in America is a sustained attack on American's preference for equality.

This also smells of hypocrisy no less than primitivism. Mr Hanauer is the fourth generation of owners of the aforementioned feather company. He founded and sold to M$ for $6 billion a targeted Internet advertising company. Was early involved with Amazon and began two other retailing ventures. He now considers himself a venture capitalist. I presume he feels no less than ex-Gov Romney, or Mr Buffett that he's created some jobs.

Mr Liu, who grew up in NY and now also lives in Seattle, was a Clinton speechwriter and adviser at a tender age, and Yale and Harvard grad. No doubt the pen-pusher of this duo, he is also listed as an executive at RealNetworks, the rather inept proprietary media format developers, which, BTW, originated as a Progressive propaganda arm. He has written and lectured extensively on mentoring, which doesn't exactly sound very "democratic" to me, either.

But I think I've wasted enough time on these jerks.