Moral Hazard
View From the Top - Part 1, January 29 2009:Mort Zuckerman, co-founder and chairman of Boston Properties, talks to Chrystia Freeland, US managing editor, and the economic crisis, the credit crunch and what government intervention should look like.At about 3:20:
Zuckerman: ...some how or another the federal govt is going to have to join in some way with guaranteeing bank loans. Not the full amount but let's just say that commercial banks would make loans for 10 or 15 or 20...At about 6:45:
Freeland: Guarantee new loans?
Z: New loans, not old loans. Because we must find a way to start credit flowing in the economy again or else we stand a chance of a real bust. So some how or another we have to get the government involved.
F: Wouldn't that impose a risk of moral hazard? Isn't that sort of Fanny Freddization all over again...
Z: Moral hazard, ideology, these are the things we can no longer think about - when you're talking about saving the system. I wouldn't care if we save the system by violating concerns about moral hazard or ideology.
F: If the govt has to intervene even more deeply in the financial system how much extra money do you think it's going to end up spending on that?
Z: Well I saw where Larry Summers estimated that it would take somewhere between a trillion and a half dollars and three trillion dollars just in a sense to refloat the financial system. I think that's a very good range. If anything I would come out near the top end of the range.
F: Of government money?
Z: Or government credit.
F: And do you think the American people, the American political system, is prepared to sign off on that amount of money?
Z: I think when they see what the alternatives are I think they'll be prepared to do that.
Z: ...because without that confidence nothing will work. No matter what this is a consumer led economy. 72% of our economy is based on consumption. If the consumer holds back and pulls back - which he or she can do - people can live very well with alot of what they already have other than food and drink and fuel.View From the Top - Part 2, January 29 2009 begins:
F: No one needs to buy a new a car this year, no one needs to buy a new TV set.
Z: Right. A lot of people can live - it's the TV programming that needs to be changed not the TV set. And I'll tell ya, this is going to be an extraordinary year in American public life no matter who is in the Congress and who is in the White House.
F: You're also a publisher. How is the print publishing business doing?Zuckerman goes on to claim that almost every major newspaper is losing money, but that he didn't get into the business to make money, he's just addicted to journalism.
Z: Well the print publishing business is an oxymoron. It is no longer a business. It is an advertising driven business and the advertisers have driven elsewhere.
At about 8:05:
F: Has the Madoff affair had a particular impact on the American jewish community?Freeland would seem to disagree. She's concerned about the particular impact on jews, and specifically actually jewish charities.
Z: Well I suppose on some level it is, the fact is that what he did was completely against jewish values, against not only the way jews contribute to a community in human terms but in financial terms - he robbed alot of charities of the funds which they are contributing to...
F: Specifically actually jewish charities that he was involved in.
Z: Yeah, alot of jewish charities, yes. My charity isn't specifically a jewish charity - I mean I support cancer research, and scholarships, and things like that, but having said that, but you know as I said Ponzi, last time I checked, was an Italian and he was the person who gave the name to this kind of thing and it doesn't mean that all Italians are involved in this. So the fact that he happens to be jewish, he's also a sociopath, and that was the dominant feature of this man, who was willing to damage all sorts of people almost without remorse.
It's easy to imagine Madoff, at least up until December 2008, was thinking about his private pyramid scheme along the same lines Zuckerman is still thinking about the larger consumer-based economy: moral hazard, ideology, these are the things we can no longer think about - when you're talking about saving the system.
Jewish charities. Keep people spending. Save the system. This is how jews really contribute to a community in financial terms.
Ponzi, last time I checked, was a piker compared to Madoff. From here on Madoff should be the person who gives the name to this kind of thing. As Zuckerman should readily agree, nobody will think that means all jews are involved.
Labels: bernie madoff, chrystia freeland, economy, jewish influence, media, mort zuckerman, plutocracy
posted by Tanstaafl at 2/28/2009 02:21:00 PM
11 Comments:
Ponzi was from Parma in Italy. It's not like Parma did not have any Jews in its population. Hmmmmm. ??
Economic Recovery Requires Breaking Addiction To Stupidity, DisHonesty
(Apollonian, 1 Mar 09)
Well it seems comrade "Tanstaafl," quite creditably, brings up very fundamental nature of our Jew-dominated culture and economy--which, I submit, is most excellent question/issue to consider most seriously.
So observe the entire economy is absolutely dominated and so much controlled and driven by that COUNTERFEIT fraud/conspiracy known as US Federal Reserve Bank (Fed)--see RealityZone.com for expo/ref.
Note then we have nothing less than a criminal conspiracy, nothing more nor less, in charge of economy, gov., and culture--so gee whiz, but how now can we treat the problem?
So observe then, on the one hand, it's much a matter of same old, traditional Jew lies vs. Christian truth and honesty. In philosophic terms, it's objective reality vs. subjectivism, objectivity the necessary criterion of truth, if there is to be any truth.
And note again, subjectivism is merely corresponding necessary criterion of Jew lies, conspiracy, murder, mass-murder, and the end-of-the-world if u let it be. For what's lie but subjectivist substitute for objective reality, objectivity deliberately ignored? And note then further, Jews always dominate for subjectivism, why?--because theirs is always so brilliantly organized collectivistically, the goyim isolated in their individualism.
So anyway, the problem, after folks have analyzed enough, then comes down to Jew-Expulsion, as of glorious St. Constantine the Great, early 4th cent.--it's why St. Constantine was made saint, don't doubt. Finally, it's just a matter of having the courage to see and face the truth. Action then comes when one merely realizes one doesn't want to die yet.
So how will we achieve this necessary Jew-expulsion?--thus we merely emulate original heroic Christians--who weren't the lying Jew-loving scum who call themselves "Christians" of today, don't forget. Those Christians then understood they had to take honesty seriously--regardless of Jews.
Thus patriots and heroes must realize, among other things, we merely need to STRIKE AT WEAK-POINT of criminal Judeo-conspiracy (see TheNewAmerican.com and AugustReview.com for expo/ref. on CFR-Bilderberg conspiracy).
And don't doubt criminals HATE TRUTH, insisting Truth is "hate." For truth tends to expose criminals and Jews.
And note Jews cannot do anything without their suck-alongs, accomplices, and cohorts within pretended "Christian" establishment who say, for foremost notable example, Christ was a "Jew"--hence a Talmudist. See RevisionistHistory.org, TruthTellers.org, and Come-and-hear.com for expo/ref. on Talmud.
Thus we proceed then to crush and smash the horrific ZOG-Mammon empire/beast--HOW?--by means of smashing all the scummy, filthy, stinking lies, one by one--beginning at the roots. For Christ was FOREMOST ANTI-SEMITE (anti-Talmud, as Gosp. MARK 7:1-13), in all truth.
And "faith," for another example, is nowadays an unfortunate buzz-word which has come to mean, for far too many, anti-reason, when it's really just synonym for LOYALTY, specific "faith" then merely whatever it is one is loyal to.
And "morality" in all reason is merely logic btwn means and ends, that's all--there's no "good-evil" (Pelagian heresy) except for dogs and smallest, little children. And greatest ethical value then is HONESTY, consistent with highest ideal, TRUTH, as Gosp. JOHN 14:6 and 18:37.
And so now, the only thing we need is MOTIVATION--to actually get out and preaching the anti-semitic truth--for it will finally set us free if we can ever get around to it, and breaking away fm watching idiotic TV and stupid football games, etc.
CONCLUSION: Things just have to get worse and worse, like economically, I guess. But then don't worry about that, regarding economy, pretty soon we'll all be starving--as we continue sending money to Israel, etc. Starting upon the road to recovery (economic) and survival begins when we STOP being stupid, evidently. Presently it still pays too well for so many to continue being stupid. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian
Tanstaafl, I would like to hear your views on secession, looking over your previous blogs I cant find anything you have written on the subject. Specifically, the idea is that a part of the US (perhaps the Northwest) would be broken off peacefully to create a white ethnostate. Do you believe this is the most practical solution in the coming decades to the dispossession of whites? I would be very interested to hear your viewpoint and ideas on the subject.
Hey Tan, this is off topic, but what's your e-mail? I would e-mail this to you but I don't see any contact info on the page.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/012622.html
Auster discusses anti-semitism & Jews further down the page in his response to Boris. (you can delete this after you read it if you want)
Andy,
I favor freedom of association, self-identification, and self-determination - thus secession - for all people. I also recognize that Whites everywhere are denied these things. To remedy this we must recognize who is doing it, how they do it, and why they do it. We do not need to completely understand our enemies, their methods, or their intentions to pursue our own interests, but it certainly makes our chances of success greater.
Bongoparty5,
Provide an address and I'll contact you.
Auster is schizophrenic. In the link you provide we see him in pro-"white" mode taking umbrage at the ravings of "Boris", who might as well be Auster himself in hypersensitive, hyperparanoid anti-anti-semite mode. Without any hint of self-consciousness or intellectual honesty Auster just loves to pat himself on the back for making distinctions without difference:
If there is to be a distinction between rational criticism of Jews and anti-Semitism, which I have been arguing for for many years, then rational criticism of Jews has to be possible.
He has never provided any examples of "rational criticism of jews" except his own, which are always made with the best interests of jews in mind and are usually accompanied by double helpings of abuse for "anti-semites". He smears and denounces rational critics like Kevin MacDonald just as Boris does with Griffin.
By his own admission Auster's support for the BNP is directly related to his perception that it is good for jews. He doesn't give a fig for the inhabitants of "the Dead Island" except the jews and those willing to serve them. For myself any organization that excludes "neo-nazis" or "anti-semites" is no different or better than one that excludes "racists" or "nativists". These are all varying degrees of the same anti-White sentiments Auster misleadingly describes as "non-discrimination" and disingenuously attributes to "liberals". He discriminates and excludes people based specifically on whether he considers them bad for jews, but denies "whites" the same right even as he pretends he doesn't.
Auster and Boris and many other self-righteous jews are in perfect agreement about one thing at least: that they can stand amongst us arguing about what we must do for their benefit. Boris does so from the absurd position that jews are powerless victims, and Auster does so from the arrogant position that jews can silence any critic.
Criticized by Auster provides a good example of Auster's ever-flexible idea of "anti-semitism":
Auster writes:
(There were also anti-Semitic comments about me from another member of the group, the anti-Semite Tanstaafl, though I've just read those comments for the first time during my re-reading.)
The "anti-semitic comments" consisted of me pointing out that he is first and foremost pro-jew.
Besides providing many examples to support my argument this rational observation has practical value. For example it explains why Auster doesn't point out that Melanie Phillips is jewish or contrast her opposition to "Dead Island" nationalism with her support for israeli nationalism.
Auster says that "...statements about the role of Jews in the Frankfurt School, the civil rights movement and the general campaign to advance the "multi-racial assault on the survival of separate races and cultures" is accurate ... If you deny the leading role of Jewish intellectuals and organizations in advancing the multiracialism and anti-discrimination ideology that are sinking the West, then I wonder what you would consider legitimate criticism of Jews to be?"
He agrees that Jews have lead the charge of Western destruction. That's all most of the "anti-semites" that he attacks believe too. It's hard to follow what he's really saying here. Why does he think Jews do as they do? Is it "unreasonable anti-semitism" to say that Jews are motivated by their Jewishness and this Jewishness exists in opposition to the west, whites, and Christianity? Is that irrational anti-semitism? What is the reason that Jews have been so involved in these movements?
He's apparently not opposed to saying just what it is that Jews have lead and been involved in, but we shouldn't seek why they're involved in these causes. The reason he's in the past claimed that it's wrong to critisize Jews as Jews, is because he doesn't see Jews as a distinct entity with interests of his own. And as I said earlier, just what does he think is the reason that Jews do as they do, then?
*interests of their own
Bongo,
Read the comment I made 7 months ago about cultural marxism at Gates of Vienna: What Can We Do?. Note that I didn't mention jews and only encouraged anti-jihadis to investigate and consider for themselves the origins and motivations behind cultural marxism. Then read Auster's Boris-like response just below that.
The more recent Auster comment you quote above does not reflect a change in heart on Auster's part. It is just another example of his usual double-speak (bitterly disapproving of something he himself says before or after, justified, if at all, with the most tedious splitting of hairs) coupled with his usual two-facedness (reading minds and dispensing condemnations one moment, while playing the sober and rational critic who opposes exactly that kind of hysteria the next).
What makes Auster special is his prodigious production of such crisp examples of duplicity. If you're interested in more, search my archives. I supply plenty. In my latest essay, Big Duplicity, I assert that the ulterior purpose is to recruit Whites to serve jewish interests. Clearly Auster is a dissimulator who only defends "whites" to the extent he thinks that when properly managed (permitted to discriminate against blacks and muslims, but not against jews) we provide the best host societies for his co-ethnics. His "traditionalism" consists mainly of pining for the philo-semitic tradition of the 1945-1965 jewish golden age.
Criticized by Auster offers an overview of my GoV dustup with him and provides several other links and quotes to contrast with his latest pose as a fearless defender of jew critics.
Post a Comment
<< Home