The Rich Country Trap – NYTimes.com

Finance

Finance (Photo credits: http://www.myhardhatstickers.com)

This is an excellent MUST READ article from Simon Johnson in the NYT. Check it out!

The Rich Country Trap – NYTimes.com.

Johnson is the former Chief Economist at the IMF.

Essentially, Johnson argues that despite the financial crash of 2008, there is still nobody strong enough to stand up against the big banks.

Of course, protecting the status quo of the big banks supports the top 1% in terms of wealth and income. Meanwhile, ordinary people, the great-unwashed, including the poor and the middle classes are at a disadvantage with the big banks. For ordinary people, competitively priced finance is essential to make economic progress in life, especially in terms of home loans and car loans. In addition, credit card finance is increasingly important to finance consumer spending; sadly, the more disadvantage end up paying the highest rates of interest.

Surely, there is a political case to break up the big banks, re-introducing competition in an essentially oligapolostic industry?

Any thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta

The great green con no. 1: The hard proof that finally shows global warming forecasts that are costing you billions were WRONG all along | Mail Online

English: Graphic illustrating the percentages ...

English: Graphic illustrating the percentages of public opinions on the likelihood of some scientists falsifying global warming research. Based on Rasmussen polling of 1,000 American adults conducted July 29-30, 2011. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For the third blog on global warming, here is an important MailOnline article, published in May 2013. It’s AN IMPORTANT READ. Check it out!

via The great green con no. 1: The hard proof that finally shows global warming forecasts that are costing you billions were WRONG all along | Mail Online.

This supplements the earlier blogs. Open the links to see the first and second articles.

Of course, there is a lot of money supporting the anti-global warming cause. This is a major political consideration because big business and its sponsors would likely lose billions if protecting the environment for future generations became a priority policy.

Any thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta