Roosevelt set the gold standard...


Canadian Geese resting on Rocky River - January 19, 1009

for presidential response to crisis with the first 100 days; it has become the inevitable standard of measurement for new practitioners of the presidential art. Until Mr. Cool came to town that is. I'm referring in this case to the article link below to a BBC description of the president's recent announcement of a comprehensive energy strategy, less than a week into the new administration. And that on top of closing Guantanamo, ending torture by policy, setting the clock ticking for an Iraq withdrawal on his 16-month timetable, with everyone who needs to be on board, seemingly on board, appointing a gold star cabinet with minor tremors of difficulty, sending an envoy to the middle-east with both a portfolio and the skills to get it done, taking the helm on passage of the stimulus package, and opening a dialogue with Iran. These are not trivial accomplishments, but the work of a man who is much better prepared to be president than anyone in my recollection.

Already, sharp edges are beginning to show. I'm having my own problems with the stimulus bill, and while I mistrust the motives on the Republican side, I can certainly see their point. Not their whiney crying about being left out of the process,about which I smell a rat, but their expressed concern that the bill is the usual Washington christmas tree. I have the impression that the crash is telling us that christmas is over. I am hoping for a stimulus bill that would fund infrastructure development, related job training,etc. with an eye to getting something tangible for the money. As a child growing up, I well remember the legacy of the New Deal represented by all the great WPA projects built during the Great Depression.

Speaking of something tangible, I was interested in the article below regarding a discussion of nationalization of financial institutions currently underway in Washington. A range of options is under discussion, uncluding full nationalization at least on a temporary basis. The strongest argument against this step seems to be based in emotion more than reason; the atavistic fear of so-called socialist solutions, or indeed any solutions in which government power trumps private power.

To propose that the government expend the funds needed for a successful rescue operation of these failed financial institutions with their proven history of management arrogance and incompetence, without taking a majority position on their boards of directors, for the express purpose of firing everyone, and prosecuting some, could only happen in America.

Our national Ayn Rand fantasy of the private capitalist as the captain of destiny, is a romanticized fraud perpetrated on the backs of the people. One wonders, are Wolfe's "Masters of the Universe" in their open contempt for government and sustained assault against its' power, in secret league with Marx, seeing the withering of the state as the logical end of capitalism? Well, so much for that theory. The collective strength and wisdom of the people is the ocean in which Mao's revolutionaries learned to swim, and in which capitalists should be made to play nice.

Nationalization of the banks would assure the American people that in return for an investment they receive an asset. The fairness of it seems self-evident. And prudent. With the incredible sense of entitlement currently existing within the management class, we are reasonable in believing that a government bailout without government oversight, carries a significant risk of replicating the present crisis somewhere down the road.

Indeed, it already has. We are learning that the $350 billion TARP program, extorted from Congress By Treasury Secretary Paulson, has not onlyfailed to move the credit markets, but in fact, has disappeared into the wilds of Manhattan and the Hamptons like pallets of $100 dollar bills vanishing into the Iraqi dessert. The Bush modus operandi - lack of accountability - has done for the Bush Administration's financial rescue package what Brownie did for New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Even so, talk of Nationalization worries people. Not me; other people. It gives visions of bearded revolutionaries in combat fatigues, and suburbanites being herded off to collectives for re-education. It remains to be seen how comfortable we are with our migration from the fear of the Gulag, to "I'm ok with nationalized banks."

A companion worry, is that the government will get carried away with its' new and unfamiliar role as corporate mogols, and force business into unwise decisions. Such as designing cars that no-one will buy. Congressmen as planners of corporate destiny does not instill confidence, even for an optimist. We have our memories of the consequences for human beings of the 5-year plans of Stalin and Mao, filled with images of starvation and chaos. So we are seeking a balance between the march of the collective, and the free market fairy tale of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and Alan Greenspan. And Dick Cheney.

Steelhead fishing at second ford; Rocky River - January 10, 2009

So we need a new economic system. One with a conscience. But how does one impose a conscience on an economic system? Only through government regulaton. The argument of free marketeers, that regulation is an impediment to economic growth, used to make some sense; until it led to markets growing like Barry Bond's lifetime record, and for much the same apparent reason.

We need to think about how to re-build the economy, so that we don't simply recreate the old model of amoral dollars chasing any and all opportunities, i.e., capitalism on steroids. We need an economy that factors in as a cost of doing business, a planet-healthy response to the compelling environmental emergencies that surround us as the result of centuries of unregulated free-booting.

And as we have also learned, when the market is brought low by the sword of it's own dark excess, it brings us down with it. So we have a vested interest in asserting the right of the people to trump private interest. To get there, we need something other than profit and loss to regulate the markets; we need an ethical balance as well. And that is the role that government must play. Not designing product, or planning production schedules, but serving as the conscience of the economic system. To compel it to serve interests beyond those of stockholders, but to serve the public interest as well, not as an elective corporate policy but as a matter of law.

Yes, we need economic growth, and yes we need the genius of the marketplace to provide it. So freedom of choice within the marketplace is essential. But it must be constrained by the power of government expressed through the wisdom of its citizens. So it is up to us as citizens to use the power of government to prevent private interests from inflicting suffering on people. Which requires our spiritual development.

But spiritual development must contend with a system of punishment and reward in order to move forward. Why? Because development is based on the choices made by human beings over time; it is not a matter of philosophy, but of practice. Within Christianity we have virtue and the wages of sin. Within Buddhism we either create merit or generate negative karma. It is our response to the choices that life presents us with that creates our negative karma, or rewards our Christian virtue. So we need the adversity of a punishment/reward system in order to develop spiritually. And the way we enact our economic choices must be consistent with this development.

Some might say that spirituality and the market do not mix. One is governed by consciousness and the other by balance sheets. I disagree. It is in the marketplace that much of human suffering is created, and so it must be addressed.

For example, the computer I am using I bought at Best Buy, and right now their sales are down. Plus my computer is getting old and I could really justify a new one. But that would mean throwing my old one away; I did not realize until recently that old electronic equipment has been shipped to China in huge quantities for recycling. The poisons that escape during this unregulated process, has created an environmental wasteland for the people living nearby, with almost total destruction of the water supply, among other terrible problems.

So at every level of commerce, from the Boardroom of Merrill Lynch, to my individual decision to replace my computer, it is necessary that the people assert their right, and exercise their responsibility as citizens to empower to government to regulate the marketplace. To the least extent necessary, but in the end, for the best interests of people present and future, and for the best interests of the biosphere in which we share the sacred gift of life with so many other beings.

That's enough on that, but I also want to point out the contrast between President Obama's energy plan - which is wide open, intelligently crafted, and contains no favors to purveyors of carbon in any form - and the dance of the seven veils Dick Cheney put on during the banquet he set for the oil industry during BushCheney.

This Sunday's New York Times editorial on an upcoming Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act, will open debate on the enduring role of the Court, as we emerge ( I hope ) from the conservative era.

DHL