the bottomline from your link <<To us, the reason why these leaders don't take meaningful action--such as mobilizing a serious political movement to set things right--is straightforward.
All these leaders understand, but never admit, that the motivation and incentive for Americans to resolve these critical problems--to improve our education, healthcare, and energy systems; to control our debts, live within our means, and so on--have been gradually reduced by the U.S.-dominated global speculative financial system that they themselves have helped create..>>
My question Laird is what is meant by the term, "The Big Bet".
The handle i get, with help from Stiglitz who was there to see the Big Bet made, was the globalization as Stiglitz saw it drawn up(He was head of the World Bank at the time) was not global humanitarianism as it was propagandistically presented, but was a massive bet to accomplisnh an economic imperialism ruled by the Fed with the CBs clicking their heels and obeying the lead of The Fed AND Wall Street, and dutifully support the U.S. Treasury, as this was an essential part of the Big Bet, a bet that would make Wall Street and all on the "right side" of the bet greatly enriched.
That the maintaining of a healthy dollar and low interest rates are critical to this big bet, however.
The big bet collapses if interest rates run up and the dollar starts a move to say 00.65, at which point the U.S.Economy collapses.
Does the term Big Bet in that title apply at all to what i am suggesting???
CrossCurrents has publisherd data showing the bet for low interest rates far into the future is the single greatest one sided bet in economic history and that bet is catastrophic in its insane complacency.
That Tom Friedman the ultimate "i will believe anything fantasmal and utopianistic", has << wondered aloud why CEOs and political leaders don't speak out even more emphatically about the obvious economic threats facing America.>>is suggesting, to me, that even Tom Friedman this gullible eternal optimist is getting nagging doubts about the greathumanitarian mission of globalization.
He swallowed it hook line and sinker that it had a "for the greater good of all" mission.
Stiglitz states it was a bet to economically conquer the world from the minds of those totally infatuated with their brilliance(he names at least Rubin,Greenspan and Sumner as central to the globalization scheme)
I do not know , however, if i have that Big Bet term of Eric Janszen in the proper focus. Max
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
