Very tenuously P: London marches and revolt

[Mark Kohut]

One of the near-radical, almost-democratic idea I've heard about bailing
out America's capitalism system is that new private companies should be 
allowed to buy up those discounted toxic assets and offer them to all of us
sorta like a mutual fund........very small shares allowed.......................backed
by the gov and able to be held as value increased..................until gov no longer
had to back.......................

Still need some money, of course...and would have to limit purchases............




 



________________________________
From: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
To: pynchon-l at waste.org
Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 10:20:49 AM
Subject: Re: Very tenuously P: London marches and revolt


The trouble with NOT bailing out the bankers is that it's not just their system but ours as well.
 
When they suffer we all suffer.
 
That's the insidious thing about capitalism.
 
But who's got a subsititue that could be slipped easily into place.
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Johnny Marr 
To: Joseph Tracy 
Cc: pynchon-l at waste.org 
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: Very tenuously P: London marches and revolt



On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

Just listened to Tony Benn on DN. The ex British labor parliamentarian spoke at this event and has plenty of ideas and credibility. The idea is simple anyway- Don't bailout the bankers and charge the people. How is it democratic when leaders defy 80-90% of the people and serve the billionaires?  Why is capitalist thuggery and anarchism ok  and credible, and the angry response not? 

Because it would be more effective not to stoop to their level. The sense of righteous anger gets lost amongst a torrent of smash and grab pillaging. And great though Tony Benn is I'm afraid his track record in actually achieving an effective policy change is fairly negligible. Perhaps his most significant act in office was actually to shut down pirate radio stations which rather runs contrary to his libetarian-socialist reputation. 






 


 
 
 


On Apr 2, 2009, at 8:23 AM, Johnny Marr wrote:


Felt like something of a non-event, although someone has died as a result of the police cordon so perhaps there was more trouble than I picked up on. There seemed to be the usual gaggle of contumely trouble makers without a coherent message to protest behind. I'm not pleased with the way the world's heading either but too many of the protestors were malcontents looking for a fight and an opportunity for vandalism - there wasn't any particularly lucid attempt to solve the global financial crisis, just a lot of sensationalist placards about Eating The Rich and Fucking The Banks.

Again, there is a genuine and valid sense of discontent with world politics across most of the country, in particular what seems like the blind reward or salvation banks regardless of how well or how poorly they're being run, but we wouldn't want to associate ourselves with basic thuggery, malevolence and inchoate 'anarchism'. Sub-sixth form parades like yesterday's undermine themselves by being so full of hot air and so lacking in ideas and credibility.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Guy Ian Scott Pursey <g.i.s.pursey at reading.ac.uk> wrote:

Hello all,

Was anyone else in London yesterday for the protests?

Interested in hearing what people made of it.

Guy


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20090402/fe8b142c/attachment-0001.html>