本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛How did it happen?
Well -- irresponsibly -- our politicians accepted money from lobbyists and then removed the safeguards that restrained lending institutions. Suddenly there were higher revenues born of easy credit and this spurred decades of growth...
But then, widespread bad debts created shortages of money which in turn created steeply declining consumption.
Manufacturers' supplies backed up from the lack of demand and this restrained production. Jobs were lost and less production meant less demand for energy so oil prices fell.
Hell bells, the price of everything fell.
Not many people want to assume the personal responsibility of a large, bad debt in a bad time. They have loved ones, families, mortgages. They need to hold onto their shelter and put food on the table, if they can: (a big if these days).
For politicians and financiers though, responsibility is a less tangible thing. In our world, a professional entrenched in a faceless system of other professionals is rarely accountable.
For instance, power brokers at the top of a political food chain can line their pockets with impunity while weakening their temporary administration with bad appointments who are willing to pay. Everyone involved will cover for the dishonest bribe-taker rather than risk exposing himself, and -- of course -- law enforcement is usually reluctant to turn on its own masters.
Last week, a dishonest pol was caught stuffing his pockets with payola. Blagojevich's lack of responsibility is Rabelaisian: there's no sense of shame at being caught. He's decided his own best interest means hanging onto office until he can bargain for a reduced sentence. Dynamite won't get him out of there.
Similarly, if you make money by encouraging people to assume bad debts, the debts are then packaged and spread across a faceless financial network. This doesn't make you less culpable, but it does remove personal consequences.
The size and complexity of our society, therefore, removes commitment, and engagement, the human forces that inhibit greed. And since size and complexity also remove the possibility of punishment, people become free to act irresponsibly.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Well -- irresponsibly -- our politicians accepted money from lobbyists and then removed the safeguards that restrained lending institutions. Suddenly there were higher revenues born of easy credit and this spurred decades of growth...
But then, widespread bad debts created shortages of money which in turn created steeply declining consumption.
Manufacturers' supplies backed up from the lack of demand and this restrained production. Jobs were lost and less production meant less demand for energy so oil prices fell.
Hell bells, the price of everything fell.
Not many people want to assume the personal responsibility of a large, bad debt in a bad time. They have loved ones, families, mortgages. They need to hold onto their shelter and put food on the table, if they can: (a big if these days).
For politicians and financiers though, responsibility is a less tangible thing. In our world, a professional entrenched in a faceless system of other professionals is rarely accountable.
For instance, power brokers at the top of a political food chain can line their pockets with impunity while weakening their temporary administration with bad appointments who are willing to pay. Everyone involved will cover for the dishonest bribe-taker rather than risk exposing himself, and -- of course -- law enforcement is usually reluctant to turn on its own masters.
Last week, a dishonest pol was caught stuffing his pockets with payola. Blagojevich's lack of responsibility is Rabelaisian: there's no sense of shame at being caught. He's decided his own best interest means hanging onto office until he can bargain for a reduced sentence. Dynamite won't get him out of there.
Similarly, if you make money by encouraging people to assume bad debts, the debts are then packaged and spread across a faceless financial network. This doesn't make you less culpable, but it does remove personal consequences.
The size and complexity of our society, therefore, removes commitment, and engagement, the human forces that inhibit greed. And since size and complexity also remove the possibility of punishment, people become free to act irresponsibly.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net