Opinion of the Obama Cabinet so far...

[angus]

Why on earth would anyone retool something when it can be done by slave labour elsewhere? 

For war, for example.  One of the reasons that the US was so quickly able to react to the kamikaze attacks on Pearl Harbor was because of the size and complexity of the US auto industry.  This, in fact, is one of the primary examples often given as a reason to bail out the automotive industry.  I don't use this fact as a justification for GM's bailout, since I don't support the bailout, but I'm a little surprised that you don't understand this.

More nonsense.  Socialism has nothing to do with 'values' any more than does capitalism.  Both are about power.  Government policy will always reflect what those with power want it to reflect - i.e. their interests.  Anyway everyone's 'value' is gimme and screw you.

I do not think that everyone's value is "gimme and screw you."  I think you are projecting your values on everyone else.  Most of us don't buy into that.  You and I have argued before about self actualization and the need to feel one has contributed to one's society, and I know you don't buy into that, so there's no reason we need to argue about it again here, but I'd venture that most of the posters here actually feel that they have something of value to contribute to society, and that it is in the interest of society to exploit their intrinsic desire to self actualize.  This is the essence of the free market state.  This has been successfully exploited for the benefit of those with the means to finance great ideas, and the net result of that exploitation has been a benefit to mankind.  Sure, we have made some mistakes along the way, mostly ecological, but we are learning to rectify those mistakes.  Or at least some of us are.  Again, I know from previous arguments with you that you have no concern for the welfare of the ecosystem either, but I submit that there are many who support both the exploitation of man's labor in a way that benefits both the financier and humanity, while at the same time being a sober steward of the environment.  Obama's plan will work.  You didn't think he'd win because he was black, and you project your own racism on the rest of the general public.  But you were wrong.  We won.  And you will be proven wrong again.  At least I hope you will.  Don't be such a cynic.  We will find a means to continue with a free market economy without endangering our own health and our own national interests.

But we must not make the mistake of incurring even larger deficits for the sake of living beyond our means, or in the name of nostalgia.  GM must either sink or swim on its own.

[Moooooo]

Like most of the picks with the exception of Hillary as SOS.... not sure about Geithner as Treasury Secretary either.

[opebo]

Why on earth would anyone retool something when it can be done by slave labour elsewhere? 

For war, for example.  One of the reasons that the US was so quickly able to react to the kamikaze attacks on Pearl Harbor was because of the size and complexity of the US auto industry.  This, in fact, is one of the primary examples often given as a reason to bail out the automotive industry.  I don't use this fact as a justification for GM's bailout, since I don't support the bailout, but I'm a little surprised that you don't understand this.

Obviously I understand this, and obviously I was taking an ironic stance.

I do not think that everyone's value is "gimme and screw you."  I think you are projecting your values on everyone else.  Most of us don't buy into that.  You and I have argued before about self actualization and the need to feel one has contributed to one's society, and I know you don't buy into that, so there's no reason we need to argue about it again here, but I'd venture that most of the posters here actually feel that they have something of value to contribute to society, and that it is in the interest of society to exploit their intrinsic desire to self actualize.

That's all very well and good to try to convince yourself, but in practice this is not how people behave.

This is the essence of the free market state.  This has been successfully exploited for the benefit of those with the means to finance great ideas, and the net result of that exploitation has been a benefit to mankind.  Sure, we have made some mistakes along the way, mostly ecological, but we are learning to rectify those mistakes.  Or at least some of us are.

Um, no, the free market state is about preventing self-actualization of all except the tiny elite that receive power and material benefits.  How does the worker gain 'self actualization' from capitalism?   

Again, I know from previous arguments with you that you have no concern for the welfare of the ecosystem either, but I submit that there are many who support both the exploitation of man's labor in a way that benefits both the financier and humanity, while at the same time being a sober steward of the environment.  Obama's plan will work.  You didn't think he'd win because he was black, and you project your own racism on the rest of the general public.  But you were wrong.  We won.  And you will be proven wrong again.  At least I hope you will.  Don't be such a cynic.  We will find a means to continue with a free market economy without endangering our own health and our own national interests.

What the hell?  I was only proposing bailing out GM and instituting good old fashioned Keynesian redistribution, not destroying the environment or upending society.

But we must not make the mistake of incurring even larger deficits for the sake of living beyond our means, or in the name of nostalgia.  GM must either sink or swim on its own.

Oh, ok, I see your point.  But GM's sinking will increase the deficit enormously more than bailing it out (or even nationalizing it) would do.  Well, unless you want all its employees and all its supplier's employees and all the employees of all the localities in which its economic imprint is felt to 'sink or swim on their own' as well.  In other words die in the breadline.  And why not.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I don't know about Geithner at Treasury, but other than that, I am very pleased with the picks so far.

[The Duke]

Like most of the picks with the exception of Hillary as SOS.... not sure about Geithner as Treasury Secretary either.

This is a bit like saying you like most of the New England Patriots... except Brady and Belichek.  Those are two pretty big exceptions, wouldn't you say?  Who's left after those two?  Richardson for Commerce?

[angus]

Why on earth would anyone retool something when it can be done by slave labour elsewhere? 

For war, for example.  One of the reasons that the US was so quickly able to react to the kamikaze attacks on Pearl Harbor was because of the size and complexity of the US auto industry.  This, in fact, is one of the primary examples often given as a reason to bail out the automotive industry.  I don't use this fact as a justification for GM's bailout, since I don't support the bailout, but I'm a little surprised that you don't understand this.

Obviously I understand this, and obviously I was taking an ironic stance.

I do not think that everyone's value is "gimme and screw you."  I think you are projecting your values on everyone else.  Most of us don't buy into that.  You and I have argued before about self actualization and the need to feel one has contributed to one's society, and I know you don't buy into that, so there's no reason we need to argue about it again here, but I'd venture that most of the posters here actually feel that they have something of value to contribute to society, and that it is in the interest of society to exploit their intrinsic desire to self actualize.

That's all very well and good to try to convince yourself, but in practice this is not how people behave.

This is the essence of the free market state.  This has been successfully exploited for the benefit of those with the means to finance great ideas, and the net result of that exploitation has been a benefit to mankind.  Sure, we have made some mistakes along the way, mostly ecological, but we are learning to rectify those mistakes.  Or at least some of us are.

Um, no, the free market state is about preventing self-actualization of all except the tiny elite that receive power and material benefits.  How does the worker gain 'self actualization' from capitalism?   

Again, I know from previous arguments with you that you have no concern for the welfare of the ecosystem either, but I submit that there are many who support both the exploitation of man's labor in a way that benefits both the financier and humanity, while at the same time being a sober steward of the environment.  Obama's plan will work.  You didn't think he'd win because he was black, and you project your own racism on the rest of the general public.  But you were wrong.  We won.  And you will be proven wrong again.  At least I hope you will.  Don't be such a cynic.  We will find a means to continue with a free market economy without endangering our own health and our own national interests.

What the hell?  I was only proposing bailing out GM and instituting good old fashioned Keynesian redistribution, not destroying the environment or upending society.

But we must not make the mistake of incurring even larger deficits for the sake of living beyond our means, or in the name of nostalgia.  GM must either sink or swim on its own.

Oh, ok, I see your point.  But GM's sinking will increase the deficit enormously more than bailing it out (or even nationalizing it) would do.  Well, unless you want all its employees and all its supplier's employees and all the employees of all the localities in which its economic imprint is felt to 'sink or swim on their own' as well.  In other words die in the breadline.  And why not.

I don't know what to think any more.  All the reporting is agenda-driven.  It has been been this way for a very long time, and getting worse, but during the bailout periods it's downright normative, with every newsanchor, press columnist, and talking head is out there screaming "we must do something!"  And I'm not paraphrasing or exaggerating.

As Nixon observed in 1971, "We are all Keynesians now."

What's it like there?  You speak the language well enough to make any sense of the reporting?