Another explanation of our government's failure

Ramblings of an independent thinker:

There is evidence that the recent economic collapse was brought about by the deliberate and unregulated manipulation of the financial sector by a relatively small group of individuals. The recent accusations and the government’s lawsuit against financial giant Goldman-Sachs highlight the schemes. The people who were in position to make great personal wealth through control of the credit system were sure there would be no consequences. The Bush government went out of its way to ignore the way the markets were being managed. The policy was designed to let the financial sector have a free hand with no limits or oversight. A few people made billions while destroying the lives and investments of millions. This could have been prevented if previously existing limits had not been legislated away. There were laws on the books to prevent the very processes that caused the collapse. Conservatism was leveraged to eliminate the government control and the financial giants proceeded to destroy the economy while getting very rich. There was no consideration for the lives of the people who would loose their savings and small investments. The leaders of Goldman-Sachs and other big financial institutions knew there would be a failure of the system and arranged to make huge profits as the system imploded. People who had the foresight to see where the economy was headed made deliberate moves to ensure the collapse while also “betting” on the collapse. Hedge-fund managers made multi-billions by arranging the economic failure of the country.
The billions of dollars that the government had to pour into the financial sector to prop up the banking industry was the only thing that prevented the recession from becoming worse than the great depression. The laws that were enacted following the great depression to prevent it from happening again were the same laws that were gutted by the Bush-Republican government. A weak government cannot hope to prevent the powerful from preying on the powerless.
It is true that the average citizen has no concept of how this system works and how it can be manipulated by insiders. It is very easy to place blame on the most visible factors – including taxes and politicians. The blame rests on the huge financial companies with the power to send the economy in any direction they choose. The only hope for the average citizen is a strong government that is willing and able to stand up to the big companies and place limits on their ability to influence legislation. A strong government is strong only when it has the support of the people. A weak government is easily controlled by big business.

As citizens we have lost trust and respect for our government. The way the government has failed to protect the majority of citizens against the greed of a minority has eroded the trust. Everyone knows there are behind-the-scenes and under-the-table deals going on all the time in Washington. Politicians are maneuvering for their own wealth and power instead of in the interests of the people who elected them. Every public statement from any elected official is carefully weighed against the next election. Truth has no place in that equation. The interests of the country take a third place behind re-election prospects and personal power. There are very real philosophical differences about how to manage a country’s economy. At one end of the spectrum lies the idea that the government must never interfere in the way any organization does business. At the other end of the spectrum lies complete and total socialism where private business does not exist. (The second option is so distasteful that my fingers almost refuse to type it.) If we have any understanding of human nature, we can see that the disengaged government is just as dangerous as socialism to personal freedom. We need to ride along the wide gray area somewhere between these two extremes and we need honest and independent people making the decisions. Hard decisions that are unpopular with the public are sometimes required. The leader who has the guts to take the unpopular path will jeopardize his re-election. When the re-election is more important than the good of the country the politician has sold out to the system.
As voters we need to make sure the people we elect have the support they need to do their job. Professional politicians spend their lives saying the things we want to hear and let their party leaders decide their legislative posture. We need a new breed of leadership. When the country is suffering economic woes we need to elect people who understand economics and are willing to exert their knowledge and influence for the improvement of the country. We do not need to know who fathered her third child or who he slept with last Saturday. We need to know where he/she stands on economic issues. We need to look deeper into the qualifications of the people we elect – going past their personal lives to see their value as a tool to help the country. We need to grow up as a people and learn to think for ourselves. We can elect a person based on qualifications, and then when he has done his job; replace him/her with someone who has the qualifications to deal with the then-current issues. Let the elected leaders do their job and if they decide that re-election is more important than their mandate from the electorate they have to go. Politics as a profession is prostitution with a higher pay scale. Politics as a public service is leadership. A true political leader tells the truth, does his job and turns the position over to the next person. A professional politician spends his/her time and effort in pursuit of re-election and personal power. Maybe we should stop paying politicians.

I have fallen victim to the Twitter style of politics. I have found myself trying to express political, economic, scientific and even religious opinions in 140 character phrases. This is the same basic problem we all face when exposed to political advertisement. To have the most impact a short phrase must be emotional and inflammatory. To have an impact on an election, a 30-second ad must tear down the opposition’s political base. The science of public opinion has found many ways to make powerfully influential ads and as a voting public we have little defense. One of my favorite themes is that when two people insist on calling each other liars publicly long enough we start to believe them and realize both are liars. Having no real choice eliminates the motivation to vote. If we do vote, we vote for a party instead of the candidate – based on our perception of the party’s philosophy. We rarely dig deep enough to see if the party’s actions agree with the stated philosophy. In fact there is no connection between action and philosophy.

(There is much more to come. This is as much as most people will read at one time.)