Doing Nothing Is Not an Option

By -
The above line is being used again and again to defend taking lots and lots of money from average people and giving it to very wealthy people (the bailout). This leads me to annunciate "The Callahan Principle": Whenever someone tells you that "Doing nothing is not an option," you can be damned certain that doing nothing IS an option, and probably a pretty darn good one -- otherwise, why are these folks trying so hard to convince you that it's not one?

Comments

  1. Rob Polley6:05 PM

    I saw Obama on the news today saying that doing nothing is an option, although he doesn't believe it's the best one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:41 PM

    I (heart) The Callahan Principle.

    Not a catchy bumper sticker, but I like it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. TokyoTom11:58 PM

    What do you feel about actions that are "undoings", like suspending the mark-to-market requirements that are forcing the continuing spiral of devaluation of assets?

    ReplyDelete
  4. TokyoTom11:58 PM

    What do you feel about actions that are "undoings", like suspending the mark-to-market requirements that are forcing the continuing spiral of devaluation of assets?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous12:05 AM

    Doing nothing is usually the best. Individuals have made plans for years into the future based on the current rules or situations. All doing something does is cause uncertainty.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous8:15 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Woody11:57 AM

    Doing nothing is always an option. I don’t think it was a great option, because the markets were led to believe that the bailout was needed to restore confidence. Our financial system is, after all, a confidence game. Maybe a stronger case for doing nothing would have been better. I don’t think the bailout is going to help us out of this liquidity trap, but it might stop the wave of financial failures for a while.

    The only case for doing nothing that received any meaningful press was that we should do nothing because this was a bailout of Wall Street Fat Cats. A couple of weeks ago they were blaming the short sellers for the meltdown. I noticed one financial commentator attributed Tuesday’s stock market rally to the Jewish Holiday, and repeated this several times during the day. Wall Street, Short Sellers, Jewish Holiday… I think the media has found a 21st century way of blaming the Jews.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Karl12:23 PM

    While you were annunciating the Callahan Principle, it was nice of you to also enunciate it.

    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous1:45 PM

    Why not take the 700 billion and give it to the people. We would probably pay off some debt. save some, invest some and buy things with it. Similar to Bush's lame economic relief plan earlier this year, we could send checks to anyone who filed a 1040. I bet it would be alot more than $600.00. It's funny how a free market becomes un-free depending on who's going under as a result of bad investments.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more