Just an observation

Regarding the current "fucked up" market situation into which the U.S. managed to pull the rest of the world (and I hope now the rest of the world learns and next time knows better before trusting all their assets into the hands of one egomaniac nation or group, and stopr thinking the "Memo Zúňiga"way where the future is the problem of the future, thinking they can fuck up stuff, bacause they'll be long dead before hacing to pay for it...), I watch how the different countries get the Government to help their financial systems. It's kinda funny how if Hugo Chávez talks about "nationalization" it means "socialism", "communism" and therefore evil satanic practices left only to cruel, people torturing dictatorships, where people leave in fear, poverty and denied to express themselves. BUT if the US talk about "nationalization", dude, that's okay because that's gonna save us. (The EU does "nationalize" as well, but 1. Yes, I'm partialized about Europe, because for me Europe is beyond perfect, and 2. As far as I know, Europe hasn't gone out of its way to point fingers at nationalization.)

Who is responsible for the crisis... oh, the Democrats for not acting on time at voting the bailout! The Republicans for not acting together, because they didn't need the Democrat votes to pass the bailout (of $700 billion, according to the American Press, $850 billion according to Le Figaro...) Fuck it, people! The bailout ain't the root of the recession. This was lurking since 1995, almost fall into the ditch in 2001, but the 9-11 came "miraculously" to the "rescue", so people didn't pay attention to it. But it was there. Poverty raising... okay, haul over some of those paupers, make them soldiers and have them killed out there. That's actually very, very Hegel. "The way to end with misery is killing the miserbles." Hey, at least there's a philosopher backing it up, right? So, who's responsible? Everybody from the President down.

Like they say in Internal Control, "the responsability is not transferable". You may "empower" someone, and delegate functions and capabilities, but you cannot delegate responsability. So yes, if the President didn't pay attention to it, it IS his responsability still. Sorry, no way out of this hole. It's responsability of the people as well, for electing him. It's responsability of the enterprises for not taking measures, for thinking they could surf through it and take no precautions even if they had a 13-year notice that this wasn't gonna last. It's the fault of people as customers, for pushing for more and more loans, for not living within their means (yeah, me talking), for not demanding the State to keep their hard earned social warranties. Dude, press your representatives! You have Senators to talk for you! Honestly people, for a country of Freedom and Right of Expression, you really don't get to say much. Anyway, you got into a pit, and now you have to pedal back, and you see you have to go against your own preeching. The irony of it it's actually wonderful. And not because I may or may not be a supporter of the Socialist Systems (I'm not really, for I still don't understand them fully), but because this is like in the 30's, with the Great Depression, when John Maynard Keynes finally had the chance to prove that, yes, he was right and Jean-Baptiste Say was wrong.

The markets themselves are imperfect, and you can't leave them do as they see fit, all guided by their own "selfishness" and feed the fools' hope that it will work out fine. The world is not an economical model, starting with the fact that a. products are not homogenic, b. agents are not the same size and evidently those with more power WILL exercise said power (hey, they are SELFISH and we encouraged them to be so!), but above all c. the agents are NOT rational. Selfish doesn't mean they are by default rational. Why? Because they are ran by people, and people is NOT rational. People is irrational, and hell, I'm rather irrational, so of course the rest of the world is irrational! So, will the individual "every man for its own" attitude save the world amd make us live in a better place? Of course not! If we let them, well, you can well see what happens. What do we need to prevent this? Intervention. Institutions, a government that sticks its nose in the market and makes sure the little people are fine and the conditions are fair. What is fair? Well, for me, but that's just "good ol' keynesian thinking", "fair" means welfare, national well being. People able to support their families, capable of providing to satisfy their basic needs secured in the long term, and the tools to get to those means at hand for everybody without discrimination of age, race, gender, political affiliation or ECONOMICAL and SOCIAL CONDITION. Meaning? Education, and I mean ALL education should be free for the people. From kindergarden to the PhD. Access to health and medical assistance should be free, ranging from a cold, a cut to a nutritional consult, a psychological appointment to AIDS, cancer, or any illness in the world... all of them along with the treatment and the medication should be for free for everybody. Maternity leave, sick days, retirement... should ALL be covered by the Government. And this ain't some "she drank too much coke and is hallucinating" kind of speech. This have been existing around the world, so they are very much possible. Oh, and I include up there also the dental stuff.

State provided education and health doesn't have to be poor quality. It becomes poor quality if you LET IT go that way. Pay no bribes, demand enough people working there, go to no private clinics... Start and finish your education in the State universities, and don't go to "easy" schools where you can pay for the diploma, or end medical school in two years instead of six. How can it be that during the 50's and the 60's universal health and state education where the top in quality and now people think of them as the worst it can happen to you? Dude, that's not because the State stuff don't work, but because you let corruption enter. And I won't go there sounding like my Mom and telling you how the corruption is the little "capitalist pig" people have lurking inside (though right now I see her point), so let's leave it like that. (However, ain't that capitalist pig sweet? Oh, I just love it! Made me laugh a lot at the office!)

So, the thing is that "nationalization" and letting the State take care of matters that affect the population has been around for quite a long time. And we have known of what happens in the "wild, wild capitalism" when you take away all restrains and let the burgeoise, the Co.'s and the "Big Private Money" do their bidding. Just in case you have forgotten, please let me refer you to Karl Marx and "Das Kapital" or "The Capital", available in pretty much all languages... as far as I know. It's available since 1867, so it has been around quite some time now. No, no, before you even say so, it is not Socialist Propaganda, and please don't say you don't write stuff written by the Russians or the Soviets, because it is GERMAN. Okay, so stated these facts, I found it utterly amazing to read in the news that this Mr. Gordon Brown, British PM said, and I quote from the CNN

"This is not a time for conventional thinking or outdated dogma, but for the fresh and innovative intervention that gets to the heart of the problem."

(CNN, London, England, "Britain unveils $84B rescue plan".)

Fresh and innovative. Say, I guess if you plan to use slave labour force... LEGAL slave labour force it won't be fresh and innovative anymore, right? C'mon dude! Some common sense here! Don't try to invent the sliced bread. Go back to the books and do things as they are supposed to be done. This ain't no time to go "experimenting" with something that "doesn't look so leftish, specially not so Soviet". It's fucked up, now own it, face it and work on it.