While the Fed is down to about 0 percent for corporate financial transactions etc., the common citizen is charged up to 25% for credit card transactions. Over especially the last 10 years, effective common wages for common citizens have decreased substantially (generalization or fact?). I don't think trapdoors even need to be considered when the majority of citizens are being pushed into a very solid brick wall! There's no fiscal cliff for the majority of US citizens either. In fact, the brick wall looks increasingly like quick-sand, or tarpits of yucky black goo created by a relative few unmentionables that the majority of US citizens cannot escape from at all. The kinky stuff is getting more transparent. The real US economy is trending more and more into Mumbai. No wonder, this article by Roubini just coincidentally used that little "word", a very unpretty teeny weeny, possibly historically, possibly significant, pre-predicting fact, besides just being a typical very old and very large city on the planet. A lot more cities, especially in the US, are repeating a very old pattern.
"Clearly, the current government is unable to bring about any of the necessary changes.
The anger that has poured onto the streets of Delhi and many other Indian cities was fueled by a great accumulated discontent ... yes, but also at pervasive public and private corruption, the absence of governance and accountability, and much more. Years of pent-up rage are now flowing out.
A wholly moribund and sclerotic administration simply did not know where its duty lay.
Not one government official had the courage, skill, or decency to rise to the occasion.
Clearly, Machiavelli was correct: for a political leader, the people’s contempt is worse than their hatred."
What's even worse is the fact that all of your comments can be general comments today about any nation's leadership and populace regardless of any specifically, significant publicized incident.
And your comment: " Clearly, Machiavelli was correct: for a political leader, the people’s contempt is worse than their hatred." hits the nail with the real hammer.
Acts of contempt by the public may be those acts that are perceived as real worldwide shattering events. This one rape, distinguished publicly from other acts of rape, is a more real destructive social event than disconnected financial events publicized as bubbles popping somewhere. That one act of rape reveals more than the destruction of one human being. This one lower level public social action mirrors final negative motivations and results of upper level deeply rooted and entwined political nastiness.
The outrage is not only in India, but worldwide.Public contempt manifests in many different ways. Don't contemptuous acts reveal social futility,by destroying any level of justice? By responding against fundamentally bad public actions, mass anger and public demonstration actually fight contempt from further encroaching and enveloping public society. The mass actions are public cries to cause positive change, so society and justice are not totally destroyed.
Hopefully, India's, and other world leaders will acknowledge the peoples' cries before the contempt gets worse.
The bankers did do it, are still doing it. The regulators plead whatever like historically forever whenever, and the taxpayers in more than one country are stuck, as historically usual, paying the tab. Same story with different dates and players.
My comment refers to the last paragraph in this article by Michael Marder. "Austerity" measures seem to be the new international "political policy focus". I think that this "focus" is due to the fact that political leadership really is not using "critical thinking" at all. It seems to me that many leaders have jumped onto a band-wagon/ boat that is very rocky and definitely not trust worthy on any level of understanding. There was an article/interview with an American economist, recently:http://harryshearer.com/transcript-stephanie-kelton-interview/.
She may be a member of a group of economists that are attempting to clarify issues about national/international budgets and money policies. Hopefully, academic leaders such as Stephanie Kelton, and probably many others can get the international focus back to reality so a majority of people can understand better that "austerity measures" are not positive measures for nations and public societies. Hopefully, there will be a trend to more realistic presentation and discussion of just how critical public fundings actually sustain the structure of nations social groups.
I think this little article by Micahel Marder subtly reveals that "austerity" measures as public spending strategies can actually destroy the precarious and often ignored positive networks that enable cultures, nations and societies to survive peacefully and with ethics and integrity for individual members. Our focus cannot just be on money policies that sustain networks and strategies for only certain investing groups and strategic interests. If public funding becomes nonexistent, then nations will only become war-zones for everyone. That reality is a no-win situation, again, for everyone.
I hate to mention the example of US involvement in the middle-east, but unfortunately US maneuvering into these societies are really negative for everyone in the long term. Certain profiteering occurs during the war activity, at extreme costs for many innocents, and future generations. These "extreme costs" are not considered by the short term profiteers, for many differing reasons, often out of necessity for individual-survival within that type of systemic survival system.
What do human beings really want? What is ethical and humanly decent survival strategies for individual nations? How do individual national strategies balance with other nations' strategies? Internationally, there is a level of a norm of peace. "Austerity" seems to be just a substituted label for what? We all need to use "critical thinking" to establish models for reasonable group behavior. Denying funding for peaceful self-expression internationally for the masses will only make the means for survival for the masses to become more violent in one form or another. There are monetary strategies for group survival that do not rely on war and violence. Portugal and other nations have used these strategies, the "public good" and "wellbeing" cannot be ignored, otherwise the "greater good" becomes non-existent.
Obama is not just a performer who adjusts his message to the audience. Obama is dealing with exhaustion and reality of the position that he has held for 4 years. Obama not only has the guts to be direct, his sincerity and directness shows through even if he was exhausted duringthat first debate. Romney does not show any semblance to credibility or honesty. Obama does. Both politicians are both tops in political US gamesmanship, but reasonable honesty and credibility to reveal what needs to be publicly revealed appropriately shows in Obama's face, and his public messages.