$400 million is for the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy to support high-risk, high-payoff research into energy sources and energy efficiency.
This might be relevant for polywell and other fusion research. But then one could argue that polywell research is not high risk
Anyway surprised noone pointed it out here yet. It is also linked on Next Big Future: http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/01/825-bi ... l-400.html
JohnP wrote:$800B to bail out the banks, $400M to bail out civilization
Get a grip! That $400 million could have paid for one day's worth of oil imports, to use it for something we don't consume today is a really huge sacrifice for the powers that be.
But the $800 billion is the sovereign right of King George's buddies, there has been a down-turn in their business and they need it. No misappropriation there. And anyway, aren't they required by those pesky legislators to NOT spend it on jet fuel? Talk about government intrusion into everyday life!
JohnP wrote:$800B to bail out the banks, $400M to bail out civilization :?
Get a grip! That $400 million could have paid for one day's worth of oil imports, to use it for something we don't consume today is a really huge sacrifice for the powers that be.
But the $800 billion is the sovereign right of King George's buddies, there has been a down-turn in their business and they need it. No misappropriation there. And anyway, aren't they required by those pesky legislators to NOT spend it on jet fuel? Talk about government intrusion into everyday life!
But the $800 billion is the sovereign right of King George's buddies,
Soon to be King Barack's Buddies. Unions. Bankers. Auto Companies. Construction Firms. Drug Cartels. Corrupt Politicians. i.e. the usual cast of characters with a few new faces.
Also note that George only managed to spend $350 bn. The new guy has $450 bn in his pocket and is demanding Congress release it.
We will be getting government as honest as a Chicago politician.
As my mom (a staunch Democrat for 75+ years) says: "They are all crooks." And she learned that from her immigrant father.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
We had a *LOCAL* here is Syracuse lose their collective shirt through gross mismanagement and outright fraud, stemming from the Madoff scandal. This carpenters local lost between 100M - 150M, they aren't quite sure how much.
On the danger of this topic going the way most news topics here seem to go lately (into political hick hack), I have been wondering whether it would not be better to give the money to the people that would loose their money in a bank crash directly, versus the banks. These banks have been missmanaged and they are generally managed by those that are against government involvement and control. So let them die! Give the money to those people that actually had money in those banks and other banks will emerge. Those will then hopefully be banks that would be better managed...
These banks have been missmanaged and they are generally managed by those that are against government involvement and control.
The problem is: the bankers were risking government money thus increasing the moral hazard. The government is at least a significant part of the cause. Had they just given money to low credit borrowers the problems would have been limited to the money appropriated.
Lack of regulation is not the cause. It was government interference in the market.
Which is not to say that bubbles can be prevented. Only that government involvement makes them worse.
Also note: the problem is world wide. All different regulatory systems broke. Why? The amount of capital being produced by the system exceeded the amount that could be used to generate more real capital (productivity improvements).
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
The most astouding thing this about this whole recession is the degree of correllation in the collapse of the banking sector. You would expect in a free market for a series of indepedent banks to arise with independent corporate policies. Some pay off, others go bust. So why are all the banks going bust at the same time?
One thing I blame is this insistence on low interest rates, the second is the ease of declaring bankruptcy. Interest is how banks compensate for risk of default, if you lower interest rates then banks can afford less and less defaults before running into major losses. If you as a government both lower interest rates and allow people to declare themselves bankrupt more easily (I'm not sure about the U.S. but I know in the U.K. there were all these advertisements on television for these private companies that would arrange it so that you wouldn't have to pay your debts off thanks to "new government legislation").
But no, lets lower interest rates to stimulate the economy, lowering interest rates always stimulates the economy its a silver bullet look how well its working in Japan. Infact why have any interest at all? I we charge 0 interest we'd have a super stimulated economy, but why stop there? Why not give out loans with negative interest so that the person who gets the loan only has to pay 95% of his loan back in a years time.
On the issue of punishing "greedy bankers", the problem at the moment has nothing to do with "greedy bankers", the problem is to do with terrified bankers, that's why were going into recession and the more we punish them the more terrified they will become. When bankers were greedy we were all doing fine. Its only now that their terrified that the economy is declining. But don't let that stop you from punishing one of the more lucrative sectors that generates wealth for the economy and provides capital that allows businesses to growth. Calls for punishing the "greedy" banks almost reminds of an autoimmune response, the western countries violuntarily eating themselves up. But don't let that stop you punishing greedy bankers and why not bite off your own balls while your at it?
If you want someone to punish how about punishing the fear-mongering media? How much of the reduction in consumer spending is simply down to the media pumping out story after story about "The Credit Crunch". Its absolutely amazing just how deeply and widely this invented spectre has managed to ingrain itself into the minds of the masses. How much of the reduction in consumer spending is simply down to a media blitz on how bad things are going to get? Time and time again you see prograame after programme telling you how to reduce your spending and save money in preparation for "The Credit Crunch" and how in danger all our jobs and morgages are etc. etc.,
And whats more in these times of panic, now all the wackos are coming out of the woodwork. You read articles about the "failed model of capitalism" and a new era when banks are held accountable to the government or "a change in the capitalist paradigm" (when you here the word paradigm in relation to economics you know you've hit rock bottom). There are people talking about the nationalisation of the banks in terms of "the phoenix rising from the ashes". I'll tell you what nationalising the banks will result in. It will result in lots of personal loans given out at low interests by the nationalized banks because that's what people want, along with loans given out to businesses that donate generously to the political party in power. Sure they'll run at a huge loss, but taxes will make up the difference. Rather then taxpayer doing a one off bail out of private banks, the taxpayer will effectively bailout the new nationalized banks year in year out. And what's more the new massively subsidized nationaised banks will push the remaining privately run banks (who managed to survive due to a prudent business strategy) out of business.
jmc wrote:On the issue of punishing "greedy bankers", the problem at the moment has nothing to do with "greedy bankers", the problem is to do with terrified bankers, that's why were going into recession and the more we punish them the more terrified they will become. When bankers were greedy we were all doing fine. Its only now that their terrified that the economy is declining. But don't let that stop you from punishing one of the more lucrative sectors that generates wealth for the economy and provides capital that allows businesses to growth. Calls for punishing the "greedy" banks almost reminds of an autoimmune response, the western countries violuntarily eating themselves up. But don't let that stop you punishing greedy bankers and why not bite off your own balls while your at it?.
What kind of ideology is this? Bankerism? I like to think we're entering into a more enlightened age, where pure profit is seen more for what it really is: leeching off society, rather than contributing to it.
So why are all the banks going bust at the same time?
Actually, most smaller banks are doing quite well. It's only the behemoths that are stumbling.
The reason why goes back to somthing called the Glass-Steagal Act. After the nation's last real financial panic in 1929, the government did a lot of things, some very stupid (attempting to raise asset prices by cornering the gold market) some very wise (FDIC insurance). One of the most important things they did was forbid depository institutions from issuing insurance or speculating in the stock market with depositor funds. That was Glass-Steagal. Over the last 20 years, Glass-Steagal has been gradually dismantled by foolish legislators from both parties, so now an insurance problem or an equity problems becomes a bank problem as well.
Fortunately, only the largest banks have much exposure to this kind of thing (they were built on acquisitions and needed high-risk investments to pay for the interest on the debt they used to buy out other banks). They should be allowed to fail; we can absorb a quarter or two of high interest rates as the smaller banks reassert themselves.
I like to think we're entering into a more enlightened age, where pure profit is seen more for what it really is: leeching off society, rather than contributing to it.
Sure, then we can all live in socialist paradises like the Cubans and North Koreans. I hear a rotting fish head is worth a man's life in North Korea.
Marxism doesn't work. Do people today really not understand why we won the Cold War? Do they not understand why billions of people have embraced the free market?
Profit is responsible for everything good in our modern lives. It may seem petty and greedy and selfish -- and it is -- but what misguided idealists who think we can function without profit have failed to realize is that life in a universe of scarce resources is by necessity petty and greedy and selfish, and any realistic economy must reflect that. Pretending otherwise will only make things worse for everyone.
You can buy a mirror that makes you look skinny, or you can embark on a difficult program of diet and exercise. Only one of those actually works.
