Scary Story of the Day

I recall President Clinton saying one of the reasons for bringing down the debt was national security.
The "You can't fight with your banker" theory,
John Marshall had an interesting post on this too.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/03/if_you_remember_not_long.php

KT-the NYT is still in business? nobody reads the NYT or Wapo except ultra liberals like yourself.

although I saw Jayack delivering them this morning in my neighborhood. I also saw him last night bussing tables at Angelos 677 Prime here in Albany, NY

Not totally a bad thing. Perhaps if our bond holders ask us wtf we are doing, we might reduce the moral hazard from the system.

Grampa Broder does a the honeymoon is over and Obama is doing too many things article today. What a shockingly original piece of wisdom. Broder does point out that David Brooks agrees with him, so it's still cool.

we are no longer in control of our own economic destiny
.
This is news?
.
As the financial crisis has unfolded, China has become increasingly vocal about what it perceives as Washington's mismanagement of the global economy and financial system, joining a chorus of foreign critics of unbridled American capitalism.
.
In January, Mr. Wen gave a speech criticizing what he called an “unsustainable model of development characterized by prolonged low savings and high consumption.” There was little doubt that he was referring to the United States.
.
While how one reacts to this news (Blaming Obama or Bush) depends on one's ideological leanings, the fact remains that this problem has been ongoing ever since 'deficits don't matter' Reagan and only experienced a brief respite during 'lets actually balance the budget' Clinton years.
.
I can actually see why Obama's "let's stem the bleeding first THEN balance the budget" approach is alarming people but I also can't help but notice that every accusation of inconsistency that has been levelled at him has been a direct result of his recognizing a mistake and correcting course.
.
Needless to say, after the last 8 years, many find this disorienting!

Ironic: US almost totally dependent on China's cash; and China almost totally dependent on exports to the US. The two superpowers deserve each other.

So Wen would prefer what? A balanced budget allowing Great Depression II, that precludes his biggest customer – and pretty much everyone else – from buying anything from China? Doubt it.
.
Wen got in the boat with everyone else back when globalization was so cool. Somehow I doubt he'll start drilling holes in the hull.

KT, This was the scary story of the day six years ago. Where was the worry when the Bush administation decided to fund the war using money borrowed from China? Had you done your job then maybe you would not be so scared today.

Great way of showing that wasting billions on the F-22, a plane mismatched to our national security needs, will actually reduce our national security. Ditto for a lot of other whiz-bang gadgets the Pentagon likes.

I'm not surprised that China has made this kind of preemptive strike, they fear that we will grow more protectionist and jeopardize their economic growth which is fueled by trade. Of course what I fear is that this is more than just a reaction to charges of manipulating currency or ship bound mishaps, nor is it driven by concerns over environmental and labor policies that disadvantage American workers.
.
I wonder how much of this is a response of the daily right wing rants about Obama the protectionist, even though their charges have little in the way of actual facts to support their assertions? Lately, the shrill meter has been registering off the charts as Congress moves to deal with EFCA. Frankly, I find it hard to believe that American business leaders who are vehemently opposed to any measure that would increase unionization, and who do business in China, are not taking every opportunity to frame their concerns about EFCA to their Chinese counterparts, in terms of reduced trade.
.
While the articles didn't really explore this avenue and I don't have any personal knowledge of collusion, corporate America has crossed so many lines at this point can any of us declare with a straight face that corporate America wouldn't risk the country's well being to put their business on what they perceive as a stronger footing, regardless of the policies being pursued by the administration?
.
These folks have a vested interest in opposing EFCA, because unions mean they have to share more of the profits with workers. Would they be so un-Americans as to use their connections in China to convince the Chinese that its in their best interest to flex its muscle and let this administration know they are concerned about policies that can be framed or tagged with a protectionist element? You betcha.

Don't be too scared KT, they still need us to buy their sh!t.
.
Dee said, "can any of us declare with a straight face that corporate America wouldn't risk the country's well being to put their business on what they perceive as a stronger footing"
.
Yes, some people can and will always say that. Hopefully the number of people willing to believe it is shrinking.

Does this mean that fighting wars and putting the tab on credit cards is a bad idea? If China is concerned that the low interest rates on our treasury bonds might cause it to suffer paper losses if interest rates surge in the future, imagine how WE must feel because the last administration gave a blank check to greed and corruption on Wall Street. They might start thinking that their salvation lies in the 2012 elections when a responsible republican gets back in office. Palin, Jindal, Romney and Huckabee lead the republican pack and all have that "air of stability" about them. Palin had an exorcism ceremony performed on her to protect her from withcraft and evil spirits. Jindal actuall performed an exorcism just 14 years ago. Romney wears magic underwear. Huckabee thinks the Constitution should be changed to more closely reflect the teachings of the Bible. Honestly, why would the Chinese be concerned?

KT:
.
Will there be any end to the frantic barn door closing, now that the cows are in the next state?
.
It's difficult to take seriously the gray ladies' solemn concerns, when these papers' editorial staff were apparently as surprised as the nice lady who sells me egg-&-cheese sandwiches in the taqueria at the meltdown.
.
This after-the-fact hand-wringing on the part of the establishment press only serves to highlight their inadequacy as investigative news organizations.
.
Once again, this remedial "Nobody could have predicted...now here's a huge story on how terrible it all is..." make-up work from obviously incompetent elite institutions undermines their credibility even further.
.
If there was any hint of a mea culpa from these papers with respect their failure to inform anybody before the house of cards came down that 35 to 1 was an untenable leverage situation --even for elite institutions (like themselves), if there was the least bit of reconciliation of their failure to investigate the sustainability of AIG's derivatives products in 2007, if there was any real, good faith attempt to re-establish some credibility with engaged news consumers, then I'd be more inclined to take their priorities seriously, and give their stories the concern they believe that these pieces are due.
.
Instead, the establishment papers want to tell us engaged news consumers "Despite our abysmal track record, we've all you've got, so forget all that, and trust us now to get it straight."
.
That's not enough. These papers are not all we have to go by to navigate these troubling financial waters. I'd rather read economists' work myself, instead of through these bureaucracies' pointless intermediaries. I'd rather read blogs put out for the sole purpose of explaining economists' response to what's going on, instead of these papers' flailing attempts to appear serious about our nation's problems.
.
When the Times unblinkingly prints copy like "While economists dismiss the possibility of the United States defaulting on its obligations, they say China could face steep losses in the event of a sharp rise in United States interest rates or a plunge in the value of the dollar." and "Economists say at least half of that money has been invested in United States Treasury notes and other government-backed debt, mostly bonds issued by the Treasury and government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. " without attribution or links to sources, they're essentially saying to news consumers "We're the news that's too big to fail."
.
"Economists say"? "Economists dismiss?" Does the New York Times really believe that we're foolhardy to trust that they've actually done the research, and that they actually know what "economists'" consensus is about anything? What investigative work have they done over the past three, four, five years that would indicate that this is so? What slavish devotion to financial truth did they demonstrate to the public while the crises' causes were going on? The blithe ignorance of their own culpability in allowing the practices of financial elites to continue un-investigated, un-remarked upon and uninhibited demonstrated by these unattributed statements of little-understood orthodoxy would be humorous, if the situation weren't so serious for so many.
.
Like Bear Stearns and Lehman Bros. before them, these elite institutions of journalism are making it quite clear to the rest of us that they are not too big to fail.
.
I had expected something in the way of a getting together by the editorial boards of these papers, something in which they came together to apologize to us for their failure to ring alarm bells two years ago. I can't believe that these people don't recognize that "Who could have predicted...?" isn't cutting it anymore.
.
Is there any word on papers like the Times and the Post taking public responsibility for their roles in letting the story of the century escape their notice until now, KT, or will they simply keep on loudly shutting the barn door?

Any Repuclican would tell you it was all Bill Clintons' fault...

@stuartzechman: Sometimes your posts make me think that we've had the wool pulled over our eyes. Thanks for your in-depth assessements. To say the least, it's disconcerting to learn more from bloggers than it is from the media.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/13/AR2009031303486.html

...

Tony Alamo as scary as Obama voting for bailouts and bozo deficits when a SENATOR, and then blaming Bush when POTUS.

How do I spell MOOP?

S-K-I-P-P-Y.

SZ, they're not going to admit it. At least not on any grand scale. The Stewart smackdown of Cramer might be the best we get for now. I recorded it so I can go back and look at it like porn, the hot action you want to be a part of but can only watch.
.
But SZ, do you want John Wilkes Booth to admit it, or just die. These guys are hobbling off the stage with a smoking gun.
.
People like you and other educated bloggers with the time and resources need to point out to us other avenues to get good news from. And we need to let the people doing a good job know that they are appreciated.
.
The death will occur naturally, I could care less about the Mea Culpa. They won't mean a word of it anyway.

Hey Hulagirl, Michael Steele wanted me to tell you "what up pimpin?" He said there's a party at his place and you're invited. But don't tell Rush, they've got a limited supply of the good drugs.

Has Obama blamed Bush yet today?

You'd think the MOOP's first 50 days of dismal OJT (tax cheats galore, Rahm WHAT FOAM Emanuel, Father Freeman, surrender at Fort Gitmo, spare body parts as public policy, loon ruin via 1000 Kennedy Bridges To Nowhere, AWOL on Russia and Red China, SOP air raids into Pakiland -- some change there, eh?) would have taught the boy a few lessons.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/13/AR2009031303486.html

Sadly, no.

Oh well.

JIMMY CARTER HAPPENS.

Sorry, I meant Boy Wonder (not just "boy").

My bad.

I'll skip any stay within 100 yawns of Howard University as self-flagellation.

For those of you interested in who's been getting the story right for more than a week, try the excellent economic blog Calculated Risk for news from economics folks dedicated to getting it right --not appearing credible to mainstream editorial consensus.

"BUT, BUT, BUT Bush did it, so don't blame me if I can't handle this job, and stop picking on me my press peeps, help Hawaiian ghost Mommy !!!"

All those grandiose promises of hope and change to the white women with long unpaid student loans, and all we got was the same old Carvile crap?

Some change, that one.

Looks like a very long, slow, sorry 1 term for The Once.

Move On indeed.

PS: When does Skippy start online fundraising for his presidential lieberry in Damascus?

While I wish newspapers weren't in the crisis situation they are in, what I'm fretting about is the local news, listings of arts information, and things I find by serindipity, not the stories linked here. As SZ so ably points out, they simply state broad generalizations Economists say and we are expected to take their word. After Judy Miller I do not. I can find far better and more informed national and international news on the web. They are not the papers I will miss (except for the NYT Dining and Wine - which also isn't as good as it used to be.)

If only Obama would get Bin Laden and bring instant peace like he promised, over and over and over...