US Will Remain A Superpower

[Kathianne]

at least for awhile. ;) Some good news after weeks of depressing, I love the subtitle:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122394103108030821.html


America Will Remain the Superpower
When the tide laps at Gulliver's waistline, it usually means the Lilliputians are already 10 feet under.

By BRET STEPHENS

Constantinople fell to the Ottomans after two centuries of retreat and decline. It took two world wars, a global depression and the onset of the Cold War to lay the British Empire low.
[Global View] AP

So it's a safe bet that the era of American dominance will not be brought to a close by credit default swaps, mark-to-market accounting or (even) Barney Frank.

Not that there's a shortage of invitations to believe otherwise. Almost in unison, Germany's finance minister, Russia's prime minister and Iran's president predict the end of U.S. "hegemony," financial and/or otherwise. The New York Times weighs in with meditations on "A Power That May Not Stay So Super." Der Spiegel gives us "The End of Hubris." Guardian columnist John Gray sees "A Shattering Moment in America's Fall From Power."

Much of this is said, or written, with ill-disguised glee. But when the tide laps at Gulliver's waistline, it usually means the Lilliputians are already 10 feet under. Before yesterday's surge, the Dow had dropped 25% in three months. But that only means it had outperformed nearly every single major foreign stock exchange, including Germany's XETRADAX (down 28%) China's Shanghai exchange (down 30%), Japan's NIKK225 (down 37%), Brazil's BOVESPA (down 41%) and Russia RTSI (down 61%). These contrasts are a useful demonstration that America's financial woes are nobody else's gain....

[diuretic]

Did he mention that China is relieved? Your owners were a bit worried there for a while :laugh2:

[mundame]

Did he mention that China is relieved? Your owners were a bit worried there for a while :laugh2:


Hmmmmmmmmmmmm......................... I'm not sure all this is going to leave them in great shape. http://macg.net/emoticons/samurai.gif




So it's a safe bet that the era of American dominance will not be brought to a close by credit default swaps, mark-to-market accounting or (even) Barney Frank.


My money is on Barney Frank. He'll bring us down yet; he probably already has.

[diuretic]

China doesn't want the US to go under, they'll lose too much money the US owes them.

[Yurt]

China doesn't want the US to go under, they'll lose too much money the US owes them.

there are many countries like china, who want and have a vested interest in america remaining powerful...i don't see america ever losing its superpower status, at least for the foreseeable future, but the sole superpower, yes, that will be lost

also, i think the term superpower is cheesy...it is not as if america exists by her might alone, then again, some super heroes need sidekicks diuretic :laugh2:

[manu1959]

let's see......every financial market on the planet tanked and oil is 80 a barrel......ya the us is done......:laugh2:

[diuretic]

there are many countries like china, who want and have a vested interest in america remaining powerful...i don't see america ever losing its superpower status, at least for the foreseeable future, but the sole superpower, yes, that will be lost

also, i think the term superpower is cheesy...it is not as if america exists by her might alone, then again, some super heroes need sidekicks diuretic :laugh2:

It's good not to have one superpower, it's a bit like the situation where a party wins government in a landslide, it makes for bad government. So it is with the single superpower. There is the temptation to over-reach. I think that happened, Bush and Cheney over-reached and almost in a metaphor for the failures of the unregulated financial system, and ended up reducing the US to another big power rather than the sole superpower. Of course you won't agree but it's good for the rest of the world and it will be good for the US as well.

[diuretic]

let's see......every financial market on the planet tanked and oil is 80 a barrel......ya the us is done......:laugh2:

Yep the financial markets too a huge hit. But the lesson has been learned.

Now the US is in recession it means that there has to be a re-thinking. And that goes for all of us. Laissez-faire capitalism is dead. Keynesianism is back. Moderation is the word.

[manu1959]

Yep the financial markets too a huge hit. But the lesson has been learned.

Now the US is in recession it means that there has to be a re-thinking. And that goes for all of us. Laissez-faire capitalism is dead. Keynesianism is back. Moderation is the word.

funny....explain the the rest of the worlds markets tanking.......they don't practice laissez faire capitalisim.....

and the lesson will not be learned....if elected....obama will impliment the same legislation to create "green" jobs......that clinton and co and carter and co created to cause the housing bubble.....

whenever the govt creates and artifical market it never works out.....

[Yurt]

It's good not to have one superpower, it's a bit like the situation where a party wins government in a landslide, it makes for bad government. So it is with the single superpower. There is the temptation to over-reach. I think that happened, Bush and Cheney over-reached and almost in a metaphor for the failures of the unregulated financial system, and ended up reducing the US to another big power rather than the sole superpower. Of course you won't agree but it's good for the rest of the world and it will be good for the US as well.

yeah, the dems were innocent in creating fannie mae...et al and in deregulation...and the repubs did not warn about this almost a decade ago and the dems did not call them fear mongers...

whatever

[retiredman]

yeah, the dems were innocent in creating fannie mae...et al and in deregulation...and the repubs did not warn about this almost a decade ago and the dems did not call them fear mongers...

whatever
and Phil Gramm had NOTHING to do with it.

whatever

[manu1959]

and Phil Gramm had NOTHING to do with it.

whatever

yes i heard he held a gun to clintons head to make him sign it and caused acorn to intimidate banks into loaning to people that could not afford the loans they took out.....

[diuretic]

funny....explain the the rest of the worlds markets tanking.......they don't practice laissez faire capitalisim.....

and the lesson will not be learned....if elected....obama will impliment the same legislation to create "green" jobs......that clinton and co and carter and co created to cause the housing bubble.....

whenever the govt creates and artifical market it never works out.....

We don't do it in Australia, we have a well regulated economy and financial sytem hence no panic. Europe, not sure. I think Europe has been scared by this, there are cracks in the varnish. I think the exposure that the rest of the world has had to to the fraudsters in Wall Street has hurt them. I would think the trust has been lessened.

Anyway, socialism is coming to the rescue.

[diuretic]

yeah, the dems were innocent in creating fannie mae...et al and in deregulation...and the repubs did not warn about this almost a decade ago and the dems did not call them fear mongers...

whatever

The gamblers in Wall Street pulled this - Fannie and Freddie were run by gamblers, just like the other businesses that saw executives stuffing their pockets with other people's money.

You might not like it Yurt but this is an object lesson.

[diuretic]

yes i heard he held a gun to clintons head to make him sign it and caused acorn to intimidate banks into loaning to people that could not afford the loans they took out.....

Didn't he do that particulary American thing and slide words into a piece of legislation about greyhound racing or something?

[mundame]

We don't do it in Australia, we have a well regulated economy and financial sytem hence no panic.


GRACIOUS, diuretic, do you think no one knows about the collapse of Australias currency and stock market???

Jeepers. You're worse off there than most places now!

[theHawk]

China doesn't want the US to go under, they'll lose too much money the US owes them.

Yup, which is exactly why such debt isn't as bad as some like to think. When you're in debt, the other party has a financial interest in your success.

[Yurt]

The gamblers in Wall Street pulled this - Fannie and Freddie were run by gamblers, just like the other businesses that saw executives stuffing their pockets with other people's money.

You might not like it Yurt but this is an object lesson.

did the republicans try to warn about the impending danger of the two companies for nearly a decade, more specifically in 2003 when it was brought to the hill....and did the dems not shout the call of danger down as fear mongering...

yes or no

you can say all you want about the execs gambling...FACT remains that the republs tried to warn about this and stop it but the dems, obama included, said no, there is nothing wrong with these companies

do you deny this fact?

[mundame]

did the republicans try to warn about the impending danger of the two companies for nearly a decade, more specifically in 2003 when it was brought to the hill....and did the dems not shout the call of danger down as fear mongering...

yes or no

you can say all you want about the execs gambling...FACT remains that the republs tried to warn about this and stop it but the dems, obama included, said no, there is nothing wrong with these companies

do you deny this fact?


I don't; it's true. Most people are agreed now that this was a major reason for the breakdown August 2007. Banks were indeed forced to extend mortgage credit to people, mostly blacks, who couldn't really be expected to pay these mortgages at the same rate as good credit risks.

[retiredman]

did the republicans try to warn about the impending danger of the two companies for nearly a decade, more specifically in 2003 when it was brought to the hill....and did the dems not shout the call of danger down as fear mongering...

yes or no

you can say all you want about the execs gambling...FACT remains that the republs tried to warn about this and stop it but the dems, obama included, said no, there is nothing wrong with these companies

do you deny this fact?

I am curious...Why didn't the house republicans pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority. Why didn't the republicans in the senate pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority.

[mundame]

let's see......every financial market on the planet tanked and oil is 80 a barrel......ya the us is done......:laugh2:


$72 a barrel this morning.

Quite a collapse.

I'd like to see it back to $50 a barrel like it was a few years ago.

This oil price decline should help, of course. It's half what it was this summer!

[Yurt]

I am curious...Why didn't the house republicans pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority. Why didn't the republicans in the senate pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority.

i don't know...do you deny the dems efforts to stop it? do you deny the dems getting angry and calling republicans fear mongers? do you deny that obama said these institutions are sound financially in 2007?

do you deny all this?

again- i do not think only dems are at fault, however, the evidence i have seen lays the bulk of the blame and inaction on the dems not the republicans...all you keep giving me is one guy...

you have more...and i expect you to answer the above questions in order to facilitate this discussion

[mundame]

I am curious...Why didn't the house republicans pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority. Why didn't the republicans in the senate pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority.


Interesting question, both times.

Afraid of "racism" accusations?? That's certainly why Franklin Raines, a crook through and through, is not sitting in a jail cell now. They didn't indict him ----------------- because he's black! And if you're black, you can get away with ANYthing. How much did he steal? $140 million?

Anyway, I followed all that closely and I think it was plain fear of being accused of racism, and now look where we are: the collapse of our banking system.

Because they were afraid to hold blacks -- home buyers AND Franklin Raines -- to the standard whites are held to, now we have socialism likely to take its fatal hold of this country, and that's probably what they wanted in the first place, so they win that way, too.

http://macg.net/emoticons/hairstyle.gif

[retiredman]

i don't know...do you deny the dems efforts to stop it? do you deny the dems getting angry and calling republicans fear mongers? do you deny that obama said these institutions are sound financially in 2007?

do you deny all this?

again- i do not think only dems are at fault, however, the evidence i have seen lays the bulk of the blame and inaction on the dems not the republicans...all you keep giving me is one guy...

you have more...and i expect you to answer the above questions in order to facilitate this discussion

I don't deny that some dems were against it...but clearly, republicans had to be against it as well. They WERE in charge and they failed to act. That's a fact.

[diuretic]

GRACIOUS, diuretic, do you think no one knows about the collapse of Australias currency and stock market???

Jeepers. You're worse off there than most places now!

Sorry to disappoint :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Yup, which is exactly why such debt isn't as bad as some like to think. When you're in debt, the other party has a financial interest in your success.

The old saw about if you own the bank a hundred grand you're in trouble but if you owe the bank sixty billion then they're in trouble :laugh2:

[diuretic]

did the republicans try to warn about the impending danger of the two companies for nearly a decade, more specifically in 2003 when it was brought to the hill....and did the dems not shout the call of danger down as fear mongering...

yes or no

you can say all you want about the execs gambling...FACT remains that the republs tried to warn about this and stop it but the dems, obama included, said no, there is nothing wrong with these companies

do you deny this fact?

That ain't a fact! That's speculation buster! Speculation, empty rhetoric, pure allegations, hyperbole and general bluster :laugh2:

What did you expect me to go all meek and whisper, "yes"?

:laugh2:

[diuretic]

I don't; it's true. Most people are agreed now that this was a major reason for the breakdown August 2007. Banks were indeed forced to extend mortgage credit to people, mostly blacks, who couldn't really be expected to pay these mortgages at the same rate as good credit risks.

Now wait, are you the straight man to Yurt's comedian or is Yurt the straight man to your comedian?

Either way it's comedy :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Here's a clue. Stop blaming the dumb niggers and start sheeting blame where it belongs - the greedy bastards on Wall Street that have taken your money - as individuals and taxpayers - and are busy pissing it up against the wall in exoctic locales.

[Yurt]

That ain't a fact! That's speculation buster! Speculation, empty rhetoric, pure allegations, hyperbole and general bluster :laugh2:

What did you expect me to go all meek and whisper, "yes"?

:laugh2:

so barney frank never said that the mtg companies were fine and that the republicans are basically fear mongering over them....? that is not speculation, i am surprised you would say so, i understood you to be more knowledgable than that.

kindly watch this video and tell me exactly how what i said is speculation...


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3QBRIsCkGQ0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3QBRIsCkGQ0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Yurt]

I don't deny that some dems were against it...but clearly, republicans had to be against it as well. They WERE in charge and they failed to act. That's a fact.

true, but can you tell me the ranking member who was angrily against any more regulation? see above video and let me know what you think

[Kathianne]

I am curious...Why didn't the house republicans pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority. Why didn't the republicans in the senate pass a bill in 2003? they had a majority.

Chris Dodd then the ranking member of banking committee, refused to allow it out of committee to the full Senate. That's why.

But then again, he was one receiving so much monies and had that great loan from Countrywide. Yep, looking forward to all the reform we'll soon be seeing. :rolleyes: