Sign of the economic times: seattle rest area

(photo: BlatherWatch)

The city is broke, but the crisis inspired this South Seattle example of the civic ingenuity we're known for.

Who needs a Parks Dep't? Shut 'er down, Mayor Mike ...and God bless America!

Comments

[sparky]

That's a great picture!

[Romeo]

Needs would be fulfilled if one of those self-cleaning $million-dollar toilets (that the City put up for sale on E-Bay) was also in the pic.

[chucks nymphosis]

That home owner had best be careful. Next thing you know, he is going to have a couple of gay bums rump humping in his parking strip while enjoying a couple bottles of Thunderbird.

[sam cram]

Or maybe one of those het child rapists dandling your grand kid, chucks, while enjoying a couple of gatorades. the stats would favor that scenario.

[Ryder]

HEY, Sam Cram

Could you rewrite your post in a way that makes sense.

Thank you.

[mudslide]

Balls for Sale

The perf gift for that bluedog Rep or Sen on yur Xmas list! Make no mistake: they are used. But they're in near-mint working cond. Certainly, there's a few good yrs left in these beauts! $100K (+ UPS) takes the pr. Make me an offer! Srs only, pls. [email protected].

[Romeo]

Are you possibly Tiger's agent?

[chucks]

Are they brass. Do you really think that we could get Patty to strap on a set? Would she in turn say no to Harry Reid on anything?
I didn't think so either.

[Blatherguard]

No, these are not balls that turn one into a republican, like you would like to see. We are looking for democrats to return to their roots and represent the left, not suck up to the GOP like they're starting to do again on things like health care reform. Blanche Lincoln, Max Baucus, and Mary Landrieu are three that should be fitted with these if they don't shape up.

[sparky]

amen

[joanie]

The GOP? How about all of them. Financial overhaul passes with zero GOP votes. (Huffington) does it matter? In twenty years, we'll have another Reagan who will deregulate and we'll have financial-crisis redux. God bless those Europeans and Brits. They know how to stop-the-clocks of the corrupt bankers.

And medicare at 55? Only for those who can't afford insurance.

When we are all sleeping on parking-strip mattresses, we'll be ready - finally - to revolt. Maybe.

[joanie]

OMG! John Nichols on Reagan's show just said that Cantwell is the single most important influence right now on the financial issues in Congress and on banking. He really plugged her. And that major economists are behind her. She's the one to watch. I didn't know that. Good for her! I'm going to send her a supportive email.

(I'm catching up on 760 AM in Colorado.)

[KS]

Back to the topic at hand - Obamanomics in full force - "Spending our way back to prosperity" - nothing but obtuse.

Leading up to this there was abuse from big government that began with the repeal of Glass-Spiegel during the Clinton years, followed by escalation of bad loans during Bush's watch, finally the collapse of the financial sector last year.
Then to add insult to injury - tripling the deficit since this time last year. The world once looked upon us as a beacon of hope in the financial sector now views this as a horror movie.

[Jason Andersen]

Ideologues, on the left and right, find ample populist fodder in railing against Obama's TARP and deficit spending stimulus, or Bush's TARP and deficit spending stimulus; but, outside of a theoretical world, does anyone even want to begin to think how bad off we'd be right now if the financial system had collapsed and the government did nothing?? We are still pretty bad off. But, no thanks to bipartisan and shallow political gamesmanship, things could be *sooooo* much worse. Ten or twenty years from now, pariahs like Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner, et al. will be regarded as patriots.

[Have I offended everyone? :-)]

[joanie]

Patriots? How patriots? That seems incongruous to me. Large bonuses and mergers/acquisitions?

A dot-com bubble. An over-priced stock bubble. A housing bubble. Now a government-spending bubble? Which hasn't really trickled down very far nor accomplished much.

What's next?

Europe is better off because of a strong social safety net. And the Brits are showing that the banks don't own the government. American corruption caused this mess world-wide. I don't regard those guys as patriots. Not one iota. As for Paulson, he robbed the Treasury on behalf of Goldman Sachs. Thanks a lot.

[KS]

[Have I offended everyone? :-)]

Not really. However, you have provided some laughs, groans and cause me to roll my eyes.
How about, why did it happen in the first place ?

Recommended reading; "Bad Money", by Kevin Phillips.

[Jason Andersen]

Maybe calling them (Geithner, Bernanke, Paulson, et al.) patriots wasn't the best word choice, but I also do not think they are the villains that populist rabble rousers on the left and right portray them as.

Old Angelo Mozilo, formerly of Countrywide, and the venerable former Fed Chair, Alan Greenspan, and former Senator Phil Gramm, now there is a whole lot thoroughly deserving to be vilified.

The awful truth is that we cannot let AIG or Citigroup totally fail without dire reverberations, nor can we afford to be thrifty with the federal purse strings. If you in anyway depend on stable markets for your 401k or ever hope to get or extend any kind of loan, or a new job, then you're foolish to let ideology or bias trump prudence. Thankfully, President Obama is a big-picture guy.

[Jason Andersen]

BTW, some common-sense, good policy populism did come out of Britain. They are imposing a one-time tax of 50% on bankers' bonuses over ~$40,000.

Banks have done comparably well because of public investment; those right-wingers (using Limbaugh's inflection) who say, "Ladies and gentlemenm, let the free market decide..." well, they wouldn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out if the government hadn't intervened.

And the most stupid and ignornant among them will try to blame all of this on ACORN and the Community Re-Investment Act of 1977! Pleeeeeaaaaassssseeeee are they really that stupid?!!?!

Brain-engage: the mortgage industry (e.g., CountryWide) was largely separate from lenders and under little government scrutiny when they were going to town making commissions off of spurious subprimes.

[joanie]

populist rabble rousers

So, those who disagree with you are rabble rousers? Perhaps the real villains are the lobbyists who paid Congress to deregulate? Perhaps Phil and Wendy Gramm who should have known their history and understood why Glass-Steagall was passed in the first place?

You name a very few corrupt or ill-advised-naive individuals. Greenspan was naive rather than corrupt in my opinion.

And if too big to fail is accurate, breaking up banks and letting investment bankers fail would have been fine with me. The stock market ought to be based on the quality of the companies it reflects. Even Morningstar was overrating funds.

C'mon, Jason. You sound like a smart man. There is a world of fault to go around. If we want to prevent this kind of thing in the future, we need to go back to regulated capitalism, provide a strong safety net, get healthcare costs down, and allow small business and small banks to thrive. That's where the jobs are.

Nothing done by Geithner, et al did a thing to fix the problem except temporarily.

[Jason Andersen]

Greenspan naïve??? Who made cheap money chic? When pressed about a housing bubble he said something along the lines of "frothy, but it will pass..."

Debating who's to blame doens't solve any problems people face now, but it can help avoid future mistakes.

I just think that Geithner and Bernanke have been in a no-win position, and they've fought the best they could for the nation's interests. They do at times give an image that perhaps they're too cozy with Wall Street.

But remember what happened when Paulson let Lehman Brothers collapse? People were talking of times worse than the Great Depression, and Lehman was one boutique investment bank that very few people had direct interest in.

Now, if AIG, Citigroup, or Bank of America collapsed? I don't like to even think about it.

Jobs are about one thing and that is consumer confidence. If there is no confidence in the economy, companies will not hire and increase layoffs. Without people earning money at good jobs, then income tax and sales tax revenue will fall, and thus safety nets get trimmed or eliminated. It's a vicious cycle, and I think that those at the helm have done the best that they're capable of to avoid catastrophe.

[joanie]

I don't think I debated who's to blame. I think I said there's enough to go around.

Well, we will agree on one thing: those at the helm will protect their own.

I find it interesting that you congratulate the Brits for taxing the bankers but condone the American "helmsmen" for protecting their own.

Elizabeth Warren had it right when she questioned Geithner over his lack of stewardship over the money. And she's no "populist rabble rouser."

[sparky]

Speaking of ACORN, a judge ruled yesterday that cutting off their funds was unconstitutional. Nothing came of the intense "investigation" of "illegal" activities either. No doubt the Right will drag them out again, though, when they need another distraction.

[joanie]

Jason, you may be interested. A repeat of Geithnier's appearance before Warren (chairman of the congressional tarp oversight panel) is playing right now on CSpan online. She's good. She's questioning the big bail outs.

Geithnier

[Romeo]

Geithnier seems to be holding his own admirably, me lady.

[joanie]

Smoke and mirrors when he's not dodging. I don't think Silvers ever got an answer, did he?

He keeps saying "cataclysmic" and nothing more. Warren asks for the logic and he keeps repeating that he had t do it . . .he had to do it . . . he had to do it. And then condescends to Harvard Professor Warren and interrupts and gets frustrated and what did AIG do?

Paid bonuses.

He paints scenarios but never gives direct answers. He has none. Not one. If you've heard one, convey it please. He's not even logical.

Smoke and mirrors, frustration, anger and avoidance. That's what Geithnier's doing. At least, that's what I'm watching.

I think he's covering his own booty big time. I hope he gets some big Christmas gifts from his pals on Wall Street after he's out of government.

Silvers is forcing Geithnier to be clear. He can't be. That means he doesn't know what he thinks about what he did. He may not even know why he did it.

Silvers is smarter than Geithnier.

Oh, and now that Geithnier's paid his buddies, he's making some good suggestions about how to change the system.