The car industry almost single handedly killed universal healthcare in the mid 20th century. They saw that sooner or later everyone would demand it, so they came up with a scheme where health insurance was paid for by the company that the workers worked at.

Which of course just about did kill them when, as technology improved, they had far more retirees then active workers due to efficiency. If they hadn't opposed universal health care, they'd be in fine financial shape. What they fought for has bankrupted them, and so wiped out their shareholders. Opposing universal health care turned out to be a violation of their fiduciary duties, oh irony of ironies.

They fought airbags and seat belts, higher fuel efficiency and safety standards, the classification as SUV's as passenger vehicles instead of commercial trucks.

GM was largely responsible for killing mass transit in the early 20th century. They purchased privately run and profitable intracity train lines only so that they could close them. And they were powerful, so we let them.

I am sorry for the workers who are hurt by this, but this is more of a suicide then a bankruptcy. Here's to hoping for a brand new, 21st century smart company when the dust settles. Think bigger GM! Think long term. I am not holding my breath.

Excellent visual summary of the credit crisis / current economic woes.

Part 1:



Part 2:



Best watched in HD (.mov download) at source:

Actually, I am glad that the bailout failed. We'll now get a smaller, more incremental bailout. Rough ride for the next year though, no matter what.

Japan in the 90's went through a crisis very similar to ours, a huge asset bubble and then a giant markdown.

I get what the crisis is about - liquidity - but there's more then one way to solve it. If we prop up existing institutions no questions asked, we'll end up like Japan in the 90's, where zombie banks were technically fine but actually not able to loan much money anyways, thus dragging the crisis out into stagnation for a decade.

The current failed plan was to buy the bad assets at their original inflated values, sell them back to the market at a reduced rate, and use the funds from selling them to buy additional bad assets and repeat the process until all the money was totally gone. That is, if you believe the conference call that was held between the government representatives and Wall Street insiders ( mp3 torrent ), instead of what was said publicly.

Banks operate on the velocity of money. They take money in, send it out again. Don't think of them as repositories, but instead as intermediaries between those who need to hold cash and those who need to spend cash. The banking system is not set up for stasis.

The proposed plan would've increased the velocity of money. Something does need to be done, but jumping to the most drastic expensive plan doesn't sit right with me. I'm totally up for $500 billion worth of no interest loans, something along those lines.

But not recapitalization of the largest banks via burning down $700 billion. Plenty of smaller banks are doing fine. Those are the ones that should be getting help, to replace the large burdened banks. A new day on Wallstreet, slaughter of the behemoths is what sounds good to me.

If 10 years from now there are no familiar old names on Wallstreet, and a new crop of giants risen from the ashes of this meltdown, I'll be a happy camper.