Sorry to disagree but there was reflexive Islamophobia, particularly from some prominent members of the Right who stand to gain, either politically or financially, from it. The good part is that their rabid rhetoric didn't take hold and we were largely spared from the type of knee-jerk response we got on 9/11.
European citizens resent banks for the same reason Americans outside of the 1% and the political chattering classes do: They are above the consequences of their actions. I do not want to pay for the mistakes of a banker and at the same time I do not want financial instability so there is the resentment: The banker suffers no consequence, nor do the shareholders in the bank, only the taxpayer does.
And, as is generally the case with these manufactured dichotomies, the truth lies somewhere in between. It's rather disingenuous to resort to this kind of either-or argumentation, particularly on a site where I go to read reasoned discussion of issues.
First, the decline in living standards cannot be avoided. It's already underway, leading to the ludicrous situation of attempting to stimulate the economies through investment in unneeded capacity. Businessmen are smart: They will not invest in capacity when demand is declining. This is why attempting to stimulate investment is a fool's game.
A Wiser America
Sorry to disagree but there was reflexive Islamophobia, particularly from some prominent members of the Right who stand to gain, either politically or financially, from it. The good part is that their rabid rhetoric didn't take hold and we were largely spared from the type of knee-jerk response we got on 9/11.
The Politics of Moral Hazard
Ah, here we resolve the dichotomy.
The Politics of Moral Hazard
European citizens resent banks for the same reason Americans outside of the 1% and the political chattering classes do: They are above the consequences of their actions. I do not want to pay for the mistakes of a banker and at the same time I do not want financial instability so there is the resentment: The banker suffers no consequence, nor do the shareholders in the bank, only the taxpayer does.
The Politics of Moral Hazard
And, as is generally the case with these manufactured dichotomies, the truth lies somewhere in between. It's rather disingenuous to resort to this kind of either-or argumentation, particularly on a site where I go to read reasoned discussion of issues.
A Global "New Deal"?
First, the decline in living standards cannot be avoided. It's already underway, leading to the ludicrous situation of attempting to stimulate the economies through investment in unneeded capacity. Businessmen are smart: They will not invest in capacity when demand is declining. This is why attempting to stimulate investment is a fool's game.