the_8th, being on the net can boost appearance of knowledgeability, lol, you know that, though obviously doesn't work for all as is obvious from so many junk-bondish conservatives on iHub .. i reckon though that is more a difference in thought process, in approach .. on the quote it's just it looked like a quote which should have been attributed, so i searched it .. heh, no, am not saying i don't think you are capable of that kind of originality as your computer Daemon tale clearly shows you have a fertile imagination, i just wondered about it .. to your planet, ouch, i would have thought by now you guys would have seen the suffering purist laissez-faire attitudes have imposed on our planet .. gawd, i wouldn't fit there at all as have always had sensed a healthier feeling in balance .. you know the bit-of-this-bit-of-that bounce, there must be a song on that by now .. maybe it's just that we have economists as Roubini, and you do not ..
...Karl Marx, it seems, was partly right in arguing that globalization, financial intermediation run amok, and redistribution of income and wealth from labor to capital could lead capitalism to self-destruct (though his view that socialism would be better has proven wrong). ...
Recent popular demonstrations, from the Middle East to Israel to the UK, and rising popular anger in China – and soon enough in other advanced economies and emerging markets – are all driven by the same issues and tensions: growing inequality, poverty, unemployment, and hopelessness. Even the world’s middle classes are feeling the squeeze of falling incomes and opportunities.
To enable market-oriented economies to operate as they should and can, we need to return to the right balance between markets and provision of public goods. That means moving away from both the Anglo-Saxon model of laissez-faire and voodoo economics and the continental European model of deficit-driven welfare states. Both are broken.
The right balance today requires creating jobs partly through additional fiscal stimulus aimed at productive infrastructure investment. It also requires more progressive taxation; more short-term fiscal stimulus with medium- and long-term fiscal discipline; lender-of-last-resort support by monetary authorities to prevent ruinous runs on banks; reduction of the debt burden for insolvent households and other distressed economic agents; and stricter supervision and regulation of a financial system run amok; breaking up too-big-to-fail banks and oligopolistic trusts. ...
The alternative is – like in the 1930s - unending stagnation, depression, currency and trade wars, capital controls, financial crisis, sovereign insolvencies, and massive social and political instability.
Lest we be accused of misrepresenting their views, actual Libertarians have been kicking around this take on Somalia with a straight face for some time now. No shit: http://mises.org/story/2066
Fair 'nuff, but as far as we can tell the difference between a Libertarian and an Anarchist usually seems to be a bachelor's degree.
So, it's fun to see folks like Glenn Beck eagerly veering into freaky yee-hah populist Libertarian zone. Go for it, guys. That's rebuilding the ol' brand.