Tag Archives: economic crisis

How Gluttonous Boomers are Going to Screw Us All

Posted on by 2 comments

In the US, walking away from a mortgage or excessive loan is becoming a common occurance.

This piece on how Boomers walking away from their responsibilities tries to go so far as to make the idea seem cool.

It’s not.

Gecko-like Greed has driven the US economy into the basement and the housing crisis is just starting to happen there.  In time, the US will likely depreciate its currency in order to fuel a modest recovery, only to discover that when it does this, it also fuels the prices of almost all commodities in the world, as they are priced in US funds.

Even though the couple depicted in the article did everything they could to be good citizens, they were ultimately ‘forced’ into their own version of ‘vigilante finances’.

The result?

When the backbone of a country starts thinking that laws and rules are not worth following, it’s just a hop, skip and a jump to anarchy.

TV has given us the illusion that anarchy is people rioting in the streets, smashing car windows and looting every store in sight. But there’s also the polite, quiet, far deadlier anarchy of the core citizenry—the upright citizenry—throwing in the towel and deciding it’s just not worth it anymore.
If a big enough proportion of the populace—not even a majority, just a largish chunk—decides that it’s just not worth following the rules anymore, then that society’s days are numbered: Not even a police-state with an armed Marine at every corner with Shoot-to-Kill orders can stop such middle-class anarchy.
Brian and Ilsa are such anarchists—grey-haired, well-dressed, golf-loving, well-to-do, exceedingly polite anarchists: But anarchists nevertheless. They are not important, or powerful, or influential: They are average—that’s why they’re so deadly: Their numbers are millions. And they are slowly, painfully coming to the conclusion that it’s just not worth it anymore.

Once enough of these J. Crew Anarchists decide they no longer give a fuck, it’s over for America—because they are America.

I’m of the opinion that the rest of the world should be munching on the sweaters of this J Crew crowd that has had everything for the last 6 decades simply because they represent a big chunk of voters.

But that doesn’t matter because I’m not one of them.  I’ll be paying for their follies for the rest of my life and my grandchildren’s children will still be paying for their mess.

Unlike the article, I don’t say Fuckit, like the article suggests.

I say Fuckem.

World Debt

Posted on by 0 comment

I know I’m a little stale with posting comment on this article (I’m trying to catch up on a number of things, blogging being one of them), but I still wanted to post this for the community that follow Excited Delirium.

I’m a visual person and I found this graphic (warning:  PDF) and summary of creditors and debtors to be the most compelling piece of information associated with this article.

Quickly, the list of debtors are the following:  North America, South America (except Venezuela), Central America, Australia, the Caribbean (except Trinidad & Tobago), Europe (except Luxembourg and Ireland), and most of Asia and Africa.  Summary:  most of the ‘developed’ countries of the world.

With the exemption of a couple of obvious lenders (eg. Luxembourg), the countries that are net creditors seem to fall into three categories:

  • Social democracy (eg. Norway)
  • Dictatorship
  • Oil country (eg. UAE, Oman)

I’m not sure if I’m concerned or inspired by this information.

On one hand, it’s the socialist countries that seem to be doing the best job of pulling themselves out of the debt trap.  They’ve avoided making themselves whores to the lenders of the world, creating a sense of autonomy, and are making efforts to move forward into the future.

Those countries are few.

The more abundant lenders are unstable economies with leaders who have questionable ethics and moral centres.  Are these really the people we want to be indebted to?

CBC To Be Cut By $200 Million?

We know the Harpercrites hate the public and we know they hate public broadcasting even more.  Maybe it was Peter Mansbridge and his ‘daring’ questioning of our repugnant leader just a few weeks ago.

"Is a coalition really such a bad thing?"

"Die Peter, Die".  (Could it be that he really meant to say "The Peter, The"?).

Anyways, this broadcast spells out that the CBC is likely to lose $200 million in funding from the federal government. This kind of a cut would sabotage the effectiveness and ability of the CBC to properly and professionally report on activities in Canada and abroad.

The shame is beyond belief, despite the fact that I haven’t been a great friend of the CBC lately.  Of course, the lack of desire of the CBC to show some strength has been severely hampered by the constant threats and it’s likely that they’ll all continue to cower in fear that the rumours come to light.

As Canadians, we need to continue to steel ourselves to the resolve to boycott all other media sources, including CTV (Conservative TeleVision) or ConWest and throw as much support as we can behind the CBC, given that it at least gives a minor semblance of public fairness in reporting and media coverage.

And don’t forget to write your opposition MPs.  Don’t bother with the Cons:  they could care less about what you think.

P.S.  Don’t forget that if the Cons ever got a majority, the CBC would be vaporized, amongst a broad swath of a number of other Canadian institutions.