US women seem to have an innate sense of fairness. Whether it is because of nature or nurture, even with our more liberated world position, it is women who empathize with the plight of those who have had seemingly insurmountable obstacles in their lives, and we endeavor to help others to help themselves. Our maternal instincts appear to apply to more than our offspring.
Mothers, however, are more than nurturers. They also prepare their children to be self-sufficient, self-reliant members of society, and that requires more than giving. It also requires knowing when to practice “tough love,” knowing when not giving is appropriate.
During the early years of the Clinton Administration, most US women supported welfare reform, after seeing that government spending toward our poor sisters seemed to have the effect of a pattern of generational poverty from which it was nearly impossible to extricate themselves. Paying for the opportunity for self-sufficiency was a more effective solution than an endless number of monthly checks that stubbornly kept women at the poverty level.
We’ve spoken often about the causes of the latest recession, which could have easily been a depression, had governments not doled out dollars that paled against those paid for welfare during the 1980s and 1990s. For our investment, we avoided a certain economic meltdown, but for the 16% who are unemployed and looking for jobs, the resentment for that deal could not be higher, particularly when the bonuses paid to bankers, some of whom were the direct cause of the melt-down, have never been higher.
It is instructive to not only examine the root of this anger, but also, like the angry middle-class in the 1980s that paid the cost of welfare, look to a long-term solution.
Changing welfare from an incentive NOT to work to an incentive to work reformed the system to one that both provided a safety net for those who were truly in need and an incentive for those who could better themselves to do so. What such incentive have we given for bankers who lowered lending standards, then sliced up, securitized risk and sold it throughout the world NOT to take inordinate levels of risk again?
None. Not one piece of financial reform legislation has passed. Bonuses based on short term profits, largely made by merely buying long term US debt we created to save them with the money we gave them, continue largely unabated.
Our bankers are the urban poor of twenty years past, incented to do the wrong thing by the money we pay them.
It’s time to show some tough love to our bankers, and pressure our lawmakers to pass meaningful financial reform that incents long term capital growth over high risk short term behavior.
An email to your legislators is an excellent place to start.
other blog entries from »
i use a combo of shea butter and aloe vera moisturizer. Works great. I use shea butter on my lips, around my eyes and nose (dry areas), My father swears by vasoline.
p.s. I dropped your name on Gina's post, Barb. ;)
Great article Kitty!!
Banking is the most powerful industry in the US. It even trumps medical. I don’t think we have any people of any party that has the guts to do any kind of meaningful reform in either. I would love to be shocked by them but I am not counting on this. Wall street and banks are so tangled up together there is no separating them. There are no parties that are not guilty of passing changes that have helped get us to this stage. Except may Libratarians that are few in number.
I am surprised you would want Congress to fix this problem. Congress created this problem under the Clinton administration when it changed the check and balance system. I do not believe contacting our congressmen or women will solve the problem. I believe we need to fire Congress and hire a competent group of individuals to do their job.
I have been in business for myself for 30 years. If a person I paid to do a job didn’t look out for my interests and do a good job, I fired them and hired someone else. I want us to fire Congress, find people who have some intelligence, know how to balance a household or business budget and actually care about what is going on.
The area of the United States with the most wealth is Washington DC and the surrounding suburbs which houses politicians mostly. Not bankers, not Wall Street employees, not automakers, politicians live there. And they have homes in other states as well.
Anyone want to run? Let’s run some VN posters for Congress. I have read more intelligent statements on this site than I have heard from politicians in many years. (By the way, I am 63 years old.) I imagine most of us have had to watch our budgets so we would have enough money to pay the bills and buy the groceries. Let’s get back to some basics here.
Hi mz, and thanks for your comment. While I concur that many current congressional members contributed to this problem, if we replace them, they’ll still be in congress, and that’s where the legislation necessary to fix this problem must originate, as it represents the will of the people. Speaking for myself only, I want this legislation originated immediately because risky behavior by financial institutions prior to the next election could conceivably cause further problems.
I do, however, share your frustration with the two-tiered system in our country: one for constituents and one for Congress. Why, Congress is protected from sexual harassment claims, and have lifetime benefits, including a phenomenal health plan unavailable to nearly everyone else. There should be no elite class. We should have what they have, and vice versa. E pluribus unum.