Economic crisis? Blame whoever's in charge.

[tigerbob]

OK, we all know the global economy is in the crapper. But do global issues resonate with voters?

Scenario A: In the U.S., Bush is carrying the can for being in power in the 8 years that led up to this point, and the Democrats have reaped the rewards at the polls.

Scenario B: In the U.K., Gordon Brown is feeling the wrath of the electorate. Having been chancellor for a decade, he's assumed to be in control of the economy. Now that he's Prime Minister, the British public is blaming him. Local election results this week have been a disaster for his party, and if repeated at next year's General Election will see the Tories in power with a big majority.

Paradox: It has been stated by several commentators that the global economic downturn has been caused by the only truly global entities: the big banks and the markets. Meanwhile, two countries with broadly similar economic profiles are being impacted by a global economic downturn, and one country is blaming a conservative administration and expecting a liberal one to fix it, while the other appears about to vote the conservatives in to clean up the socialists' mess.

Question: Do voters consider that some factors may be outside the control of national governments, or do they just want to kick the incumbent to make themselves feel better?

Caveat: Yes, I know it's a broad analogy, but the question remains about what impact global issues have on domestic elections, and what power domestic administrations have to shape global issues.

 

[wvulax]

I think it's kind of logical. If something isn't working try something new.

 

[sealybobo]

OK, we all know the global economy is in the crapper. But do global issues resonate with voters?

Scenario A: In the U.S., Bush is carrying the can for being in power in the 8 years that led up to this point, and the Democrats have reaped the rewards at the polls.

Scenario B: In the U.K., Gordon Brown is feeling the wrath of the electorate. Having been chancellor for a decade, he's assumed to be in control of the economy. Now that he's Prime Minister, the British public is blaming him. Local election results this week have been a disaster for his party, and if repeated at next year's General Election will see the Tories in power with a big majority.

Paradox: It has been stated by several commentators that the global economic downturn has been caused by the only truly global entities: the big banks and the markets. Meanwhile, two countries with broadly similar economic profiles are being impacted by a global economic downturn, and one country is blaming a conservative administration and expecting a liberal one to fix it, while the other appears about to vote the conservatives in to clean up the socialists' mess.

Question: Do voters consider that some factors may be outside the control of national governments, or do they just want to kick the incumbent to make themselves feel better?

Caveat: Yes, I know it's a broad analogy, but the question remains about what impact global issues have on domestic elections, and what power domestic administrations have to shape global issues.

The private bankers that own our Federal Reserve and control us financially also control Europe, Australia, etc. They don't control all of the muslim world YET and they don't control Venesuela, although they are trying. And they don't control Cuba. But most everywhere else.

They took the global economy down on purpose. Its called disaster capitalism.

And voters don't have a clue. Most anyways.

 

[Neubarth]

The private bankers that own our Federal Reserve and control us financially also control Europe, Australia, etc. They don't control all of the muslim world YET and they don't control Venesuela, although they are trying. And they don't control Cuba. But most everywhere else.

They took the global economy down on purpose. Its called disaster capitalism.

And voters don't have a clue. Most anyways.

Bobo, That is one of the more crazy theories I have ever seen on a message board. You have won the prize.

 

[tigerbob]

The private bankers that own our Federal Reserve and control us financially also control Europe, Australia, etc. They don't control all of the muslim world YET and they don't control Venesuela, although they are trying. And they don't control Cuba. But most everywhere else.

They took the global economy down on purpose. Its called disaster capitalism.

And voters don't have a clue. Most anyways.

Bobo, That is one of the more crazy theories I have ever seen on a message board. You have won the prize.

His last observation is right on though.

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

Paradox: It has been stated by several commentators that the global economic downturn has been caused by the only truly global entities: the big banks and the markets.

Well actually I find the paradox is that few seem to grasp that the actual cause of the current down turn lies squarely at the doorstep of our current system of government economic interventionalism and the ponzi scheme more commonly known as fiat currency and instead seem to think it's productive to use misery as a tool for sticking pins in their political rivals.

Blaming the current politicians in charge (or their party), banks or free markets ignores the root cause entirely which is the system that has been in place for many decades that allows the creation of money out of thin air, the artificial manipulation of interest rates, excessive government spending and interventationalist policies by central government which created the opportunity to offload enormous capital risk in the first place, after all who created Fannie & Freddie? sure as heck wasn't the free market.

If one was truley interested in breaking the boom-bust cycle, one would first make the sacrifices necessary to return to sound money and second bind the government back in the chains the constitution set forth for it. Acting otherwise will just lead to repetition of what we're seeing now at an ever increasing severity and magnitude with each new cycle.

 

[editec]

The banks are all going out of business

No wait! Now they now have so much money they don't need a bailout.

Interesting turn of events, isn't it?

Still Sealy must be entirely crazy when he opines that this economy is being manipulated for the benefit of a few.

Because as we all know only Arabs are ever involved in conspiracies.