TIMOTHY EGAN: How Obama Saved Capitalism and Lost the Midterms

[Beet]

If I were one of the big corporate donors who bankrolled the Republican tide that carried into office more than 50 new Republicans in the House, I would be wary of what you just bought.

For no matter your view of President Obama, he effectively saved capitalism. And for that, he paid a terrible political price.

Suppose you had $100,000 to invest on the day Barack Obama was inaugurated. Why bet on a liberal Democrat? Here’s why: the presidency of George W. Bush produced the worst stock market decline of any president in history. The net worth of American households collapsed as Bush slipped away. And if you needed a loan to buy a house or stay in business, private sector borrowing was dead when he handed over power.

As of election day, Nov. 2, 2010, your $100,000 was worth about $177,000 if invested strictly in the NASDAQ average for the entirety of the Obama administration, and $148,000 if bet on the Standard & Poors 500 major companies. This works out to returns of 77 percent and 48 percent.

But markets, though forward-looking, are not considered accurate measurements of the economy, and the Great Recession skewed the Bush numbers. O.K. How about looking at the big financial institutions that keep the motors of capitalism running — banks and auto companies?

The banking system was resuscitated by $700 billion in bailouts started by Bush (a fact unknown by a majority of Americans), and finished by Obama, with help from the Federal Reserve. It worked. The government is expected to break even on a risky bet to stabilize the global free market system. Had Obama followed the populist instincts of many in his party, the underpinnings of big capitalism could have collapsed.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/how-obama-saved-capitalism-and-lost-the-midterms/?partner=rss&emc=rss

[Zarn]

Three Things

1- Statism is not Capitalism. If you are using uncapitalistic practices, it's not saving capitalism. It's replacing it.

2- That bailout is a known flop, even to many Democrats. Even Michael Moore made a big stink about it. Remember the bonuses, among other things?

3- The people actually concerned with the budget do not like Bush 43. They made a big deal about stopping the bailout, as it was happening. They just think he was not as bad as Obama.

[Torie]

Actually TARP saved capitalism, passed under Bush. Obama was better at saving the jobs of public employees.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Obama delivered for Wall St. He never gave a crap about Main St. Tuesday was no surprise given that. It's time to have a 2nd party in this country.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Obama delivered for Wall St. He never gave a crap about Main St. Tuesday was no surprise given that. It's time to have a 2nd party in this country.

Lol, you actually think it would've mattered if Obama went through a more left agenda?

Either way, it would've still meant that the Dems are horrible at communicating their point, so they probably would've lost the House anyways by big margins, especially considering the political alignment this country is in right now.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Actually TARP saved capitalism, passed under Bush. Obama was better at saving the jobs of public employees.

Torie,

You really are a hack!

Bush did not, repeat NOT, REPEAT NOT, "save capitalism."

You have told some whoppers here over the time but that's really over the top!!!

Bush merely gave public money to provide for bonuses for corporate big wigs who destoyed their own companies.

Capitalism does NOT include the concept of 'too big to fail.'

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Obama delivered for Wall St. He never gave a crap about Main St. Tuesday was no surprise given that. It's time to have a 2nd party in this country.

Lol, you actually think it would've mattered if Obama went through a more left agenda?

Either way, it would've still meant that the Dems are horrible at communicating their point, so they probably would've lost the House anyways by big margins, especially considering the political alignment this country is in right now.

My advice to Obama doesn't consist solely of "move to the left". Obviously the Democratic messaging is terrible, too. And even if it was inevitable that the Democrats lose 65 House seats, they might as well have passed some good legislation while they had the chance.

[opebo]

1- Statism is not Capitalism. If you are using uncapitalistic practices, it's not saving capitalism. It's replacing it.

Capitalism does NOT include the concept of 'too big to fail.'

What you capitalist deludeds fail to understand is capitalism is also Statism (the state imposing rule by the owners), and it failed, as it always fails - it will always fail to maximize economic growth and the well being of the majority.  It can be 'saved' by limiting it - balancing it with something better, namely state intervention.

Your lazy-fairy fantasy leads only to enormous unemployment, bare subsistence wages for those who are employed, and nearly all of society's production being monopolized by a tiny elite.

Now, I'd much prefer to have full-on Socialism compared to the above slave-camp, but I'm perfectly willing to compromise for a Social Democracy. (private restaurants and so forth).  Why aren't you?

2- That bailout is a known flop, even to many Democrats. Even Michael Moore made a big stink about it. Remember the bonuses, among other things?

No, the bailout was a stunning success, and a profit maker for the State.  The bonuses and other minor complaints are of no importance at all - the bailout saved capitalism from its inevitable descent in to catastrophic collapse.

[CARLHAYDEN]

1- Statism is not Capitalism. If you are using uncapitalistic practices, it's not saving capitalism. It's replacing it.

Capitalism does NOT include the concept of 'too big to fail.'

What you capitalist deludeds fail to understand is capitalism is also Statism (the state imposing rule by the owners), and it failed, as it always fails - it will always fail to maximize economic growth and the well being of the majority.  It can be 'saved' by limiting it - balancing it with something better, namely state intervention.

Your lazy-fairy fantasy leads only to enormous unemployment, bare subsistence wages for those who are employed, and nearly all of society's production being monopolized by a tiny elite.

Now, I'd much prefer to have full-on Socialism compared to the above slave-camp, but I'm perfectly willing to compromise for a Social Democracy. (private restaurants and so forth).  Why aren't you?

2- That bailout is a known flop, even to many Democrats. Even Michael Moore made a big stink about it. Remember the bonuses, among other things?

No, the bailout was a stunning success, and a profit maker for the State.  The bonuses and other minor complaints are of no importance at all - the bailout saved capitalism from its inevitable descent in to catastrophic collapse.

Opebo,

Are you using Torie as an alter ego?

You both support statism.

Both of you seem to believe (rotflmao) that cqapitalism and statism are the same thring .

Both of you approve of a big centralized government which will rule over use for 'our own good,' even if it has to kill us.

Normally, I would say that you Opebo persohna is funnoier, but, the laughab ly absurd statement by 'Torie,' is funny as hell.

[Beet]

Was the Cold War not a contest between capitalism and communism? During the Cold War, the government was involved in the economy as well, although free markets were allowed to drive the vast majority of economic activity. And we called that capitalism. And so it is today. It is capitalism, not statism. If anything short of Ayn Rand's utopia is not capitalism, then we will never have capitalism.

The ironic thing is that had capitalism really been allowed to collapse, the ultimate result would be far, far more 'statist' than anything we have today. So Obama [with Bush circa late 2008] has done capitalism / libertarianism a double favor: first, by saving a relatively free system from collapse, prevented a far more statist future. Second, by bringing conservative anger on him, has energized the libertarians politically through the GOP and tea party. Because of this, he may be one of the most libertarian Presidents in history.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Was the Cold War not a contest between capitalism and communism? During the Cold War, the government was involved in the economy as well, although free markets were allowed to drive the vast majority of economic activity. And we called that capitalism. And so it is today. It is capitalism, not statism. If anything short of Ayn Rand's utopia is not capitalism, then we will never have capitalism.

The ironic thing is that had capitalism really been allowed to collapse, the ultimate result would be far, far more 'statist' than anything we have today. So Obama [with Bush circa late 2008] has done capitalism / libertarianism a double favor: first, by saving a relatively free system from collapse, prevented a far more statist future. Second, by bringing conservative anger on him, has energized the libertarians politically through the GOP and tea party. Because of this, he may be one of the most libertarian Presidents in history.

Yeah, and Hitler saved the jews, (by the explanation you are giving).

You have really lost it.

Nobody with any sense whatsoever would call Obama a libertarian!

[Zarn]

Was the Cold War not a contest between capitalism and communism? During the Cold War, the government was involved in the economy as well, although free markets were allowed to drive the vast majority of economic activity. And we called that capitalism. And so it is today. It is capitalism, not statism. If anything short of Ayn Rand's utopia is not capitalism, then we will never have capitalism.

The ironic thing is that had capitalism really been allowed to collapse, the ultimate result would be far, far more 'statist' than anything we have today. So Obama [with Bush circa late 2008] has done capitalism / libertarianism a double favor: first, by saving a relatively free system from collapse, prevented a far more statist future. Second, by bringing conservative anger on him, has energized the libertarians politically through the GOP and tea party. Because of this, he may be one of the most libertarian Presidents in history.

What do Dems feel a need to spin everything?

Capitalism works with no intervention, because otherwise it is uncapitalistic. This intervention was also unsuccessful. Obama relied on the market to bounce back on its own (something it tends to do), so he could claim credit. It didn't work.

[Frink]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...and the Soviet Union wasn't actually Marxist, but in the real world things aren't quite so black and white.

[??????????]

I stopped reading after the first paragraph. The Democrats outspent the Republicans this cycle.

[Zarn]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...and the Soviet Union wasn't actually Marxist, but in the real world things aren't quite so black and white.

People claimed the Soviet Union was marxist?

The bailout went against one of the most basic principles of capitalism. It's not a minor alteration.

[Torie]

CARL, calm down! You are shouting so loud at me, that my ears are ringing. Thanks.

And I had no idea that I would agitate you so. I mean, I thought I was posting something troglodytic and right wing, giving Obama a little b slap in the process, and suddenly you erupt and imply that I am some kind of commie pinko.

You know, THC can have a very soothing effect on all of those jangled nerves. Just a thought.

[Sam Spade]

TARP, Bush's actions in 2008 and Obama's actions have done nothing other than prolong and worsen the agony.  Perhaps more importantly, we risk real hell if these types of policies are continued.

[anvi]

Carl, what happens to a free market economy when the banks fail?

Torie, actually, it sounds to me like the people you're b-slapping are public employees.

Jesus Christ, political rhetoric in this country is depressing.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Carl, what happens to a free market economy when the banks fail?

Torie, actually, it sounds to me like the people you're b-slapping are public employees.

Jesus Christ, political rhetoric in this country is depressing.

Lots of businesses fail in a free economy.

Torie doesn't want people to be responsible for their own actions.

[CARLHAYDEN]

CARL, calm down! You are shouting so loud at me, that my ears are ringing. Thanks.

And I had no idea that I would agitate you so. I mean, I thought I was posting something troglodytic and right wing, giving Obama a little b slap in the process, and suddenly you erupt and imply that I am some kind of commie pinko.

You know, THC can have a very soothing effect on all of those jangled nerves. Just a thought.

Try telling the truth for a change!

I don't object to you agreeing with Opebo, but rather with your misrepresentations.

I realize that lying is so soothing to you .

Oh, and Opebo is far more entertaining in his posts,

[anvi]

Carl, what happens to a free market economy when the banks fail?

Lots of businesses fail in a free economy.

Torie doesn't want people to be responsible for their own actions.

Of course lots of businesses fail, but the failure of businesses, even very large ones, in a free-market economy does not have the same impact as major and massive banks that hold billions and billions of dollars of the assets of other individuals and businesses, as well as make businesses constant loans so they can get through their monthly and yearly business cycles.   

Torie has always sounded like a Republican to me, snarky shots at Obama and public employees and all.   

[CARLHAYDEN]

Carl, what happens to a free market economy when the banks fail?

Lots of businesses fail in a free economy.

Torie doesn't want people to be responsible for their own actions.

Of course lots of businesses fail, but the failure of businesses, even very large ones, in a free-market economy does not have the same impact as major and massive banks that hold billions and billions of dollars of the assets of other individuals and businesses, as well as make businesses constant loans so they can get through their monthly and yearly business cycles.   

Torie has always sounded like a Republican to me, snarky shots at Obama and public employees and all.   

So, if a business gets to be gig enought, it w\ill not be allowed to fail?

There are a lot of big businesses in the United States that have failed, and we have survived just fine.

does anyone remember A & P?

If Torie had his way we would be spending billions proping up the buggy whip industry.

[patrick1]

Carl, what happens to a free market economy when the banks fail?

Lots of businesses fail in a free economy.

Torie doesn't want people to be responsible for their own actions.

Of course lots of businesses fail, but the failure of businesses, even very large ones, in a free-market economy does not have the same impact as major and massive banks that hold billions and billions of dollars of the assets of other individuals and businesses, as well as make businesses constant loans so they can get through their monthly and yearly business cycles.   

Torie has always sounded like a Republican to me, snarky shots at Obama and public employees and all.   

So, if a business gets to be gig enought, it w\ill not be allowed to fail?

There are a lot of big businesses in the United States that have failed, and we have survived just fine.

does anyone remember A & P?

If Torie had his way we would be spending billions proping up the buggy whip industry.

Carl, it is not that a business would have failed, rather an entire industry.  An industry that contributes 8% toward GDP and makes possible pretty much every other economic activity.  Now you can argue that it never should have gotten to that point, but cascading bank failures would have been crippling to the US and global economy.  We basically bought ourselves some time to reform the system, however, I don't really see any movement on that front.

[anvi]

Exactly.  I do remember A&P, and they didn't make everybody else's individual and business transactions possible.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Carl, what happens to a free market economy when the banks fail?

Lots of businesses fail in a free economy.

Torie doesn't want people to be responsible for their own actions.

Of course lots of businesses fail, but the failure of businesses, even very large ones, in a free-market economy does not have the same impact as major and massive banks that hold billions and billions of dollars of the assets of other individuals and businesses, as well as make businesses constant loans so they can get through their monthly and yearly business cycles.   

Torie has always sounded like a Republican to me, snarky shots at Obama and public employees and all.   

So, if a business gets to be gig enought, it w\ill not be allowed to fail?

There are a lot of big businesses in the United States that have failed, and we have survived just fine.

does anyone remember A & P?

If Torie had his way we would be spending billions proping up the buggy whip industry.

Carl, it is not that a business would have failed, rather an entire industry.  An industry that contributes 8% toward GDP and makes possible pretty much every other economic activity.  Now you can argue that it never should have gotten to that point, but cascading bank failures would have been crippling to the US and global economy.  We basically bought ourselves some time to reform the system, however, I don't really see any movement on that front.

Yup, the world would have ended.

There would be no survivors.

NOT!

What happened was the federazl government stepped in and told large institutions that the rules that apply to the small guys don't apply to them.

The feds decided that large businesses would not be allowed to fail.

Its simply a case of the government picking winners and losers.

I prefer to let the marketplace make such suggests.

Statists, like Torie, really love big government and hate freedom, including free markets.