Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Quovadis ?

It appears that the voters voted against the bailout

Now where to go ?

"There's a real sense of frustration. People see their tax dollars spent bailing out financial institutions, and they themselves are not doing well,"

There were also a lot of eyes rolling on this bailout. We're heard this kind of thing before"

Senior members blasted Bush's economic policies and lashed out at "a right wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation."

Personally, I believe the engine of this whole change is the market and all of the major investment banks have large positions in fossil fuels - in fact, Forbes recently claimed that if those banks were forced to liquidate their positions in fossil fuels, prices would drop to as low as $50-$75 a barrel - and that's what the current bailout is intended to avoid.

Goldman Sachs also has huge holdings in fossil fuels, and the recent $5 billion Buffet injection should be viewed in the light of Buffet's extensive energy investments - PetroChina, ConocoPhillips, and Mid-American and Constellation Energy.

In other words, if only energy could be harnessed to take the place of oil . . .

If the US can come to an agreement with Saudi Arabia or a middle eastern consortium, who can easily fund a part of the bail-out with a guarantee that they would maintain the price-level [so that it doesn't fall], in addition to a commitment to purchasing oil for the next ten years

Of course a part of the oil costs can be offloaded to the "taxpayer"

Obviously there's more to it

Speaking as an Indian - The US can just get used to the Third World conditions - In other words the IMF proposes an austerity package for the U.S. as a precondition on a World Bank loan rescue package. Obviously their first demand would be that the US privatize Social Security and halt about 70% funding for public education. How is that for change?

That said, I used to work in a financial company that got influenced by the 'green committee' - trying to change the way we do business in an environmentally intelligent way. Infact the people involved who are mostly middle class people have basically no urgency or real understanding of what the hell is going on. They treat it like an irritating fad, and easily take 'no' as an answer when trying to change the way the company operates, or more so as they operate.

It is apparent how interconnected we have become. In other words, the pollution in India's Ganges River could have a direct impact on the quality of life in New York. Every coal factory that China builds, competes for resources with an Indonesian child. And to top it all, every time a woman in Southern California switched on her air conditioner, its effect travels to the Brazilian slums.

In short there is no way we can regulate our way out of this problem, but only innovate. This in turn requires legislation and rules.

But are we prepared for that ?

No comments: