...Standing in front of the TV in my bedroom, lacing a belt through the loops of my jeans, I'm looking at pundits positively chortling with glee -- chortling! -- over this "new and different time" in which the President gets to decide "if CitiBank should be allowed to go under, if GM should be allowed to go under..." And they are very warm'n'fuzzy about this, if a bit concerned about the horrors that may come to pass if the helping hand of AmSoc doesn't grease the skids.
Words fail me. I tried an only slightly minced oath and it wasn't enough. Even an unminced one isn't enough. Failing businesses must be allowed to auger in. Why is it even a question of "allow?" Yes, it hurts it hurts, I know this, I rode medium-market radio almost all the way down (thanks to multiple-station ownership and modern automation, it has since come back, a little, but it's much, much smaller).
Whatever you reward, you get more of. Reward banks that make bad loans, carmakers with the wit, decision-making process and response time of diplodocids? Guess what you'll get!
I have seen the future and short-term, it is made of Fail. Long-term? Jury's still out -- and we're all on it.
The short term future is most certainly made of fail. The long term future is made of you.
ReplyDeleteIf someone (a single person) has to decide whether these businesses fail or not, why should that be the president? If it was W in office, they'd be screaming bloody murder. Blech. If I had any money, I'd bury it in the yard, if I had a yard.
ReplyDelete