By Owen Paine on Monday February 1, 2010 11:17 AM
"Be thankful for little things," my alcoholic purplish bubble of a neighbor likes to say as he passes me an unopened beer over the fence. I send this along in that same spirit. It's the estimable Henwood Doug, Father Smiff's idea of an economist. Doug is being interviewed conspiratorially by Franz Frank, and as we zoom in, M. Poule is clearing away some mental debris left by the fizzle of POTU Obama's stimpak:
"It's more about quality than quantity. On paper, the StimPak is quite large. Of course, it'd be nice if it were larger, but as far as these things go in our imaginatively parched times, the size isn't bad. But a fundamental problem with it is that the Dems didn't want it to be seen as some New Dealish government jobs program-they bragged about how it was going to be about creating private sector jobs, which are somehow "realer" than public sector ones. I guess that means it's realer to be a food stylist than a teacher.... "Later Franz asks him, approximately, "Why in God's name did those White House numbskulls fire off this wet squib?"
Doug:
"Their own predilections, and the configurations of elite and popular sentiment-though their predilections and elite sentiment overlap considerably. The Obama people like The Market, and want to nudge it into creating more private sector jobs. Elite opinion has always hated public sector jobs... Anything that lessens the disciplinary sting of unemployment, like WPA-style jobs, makes them worry about the workers getting too confident and too demanding.... there's a bias among neoliberals, like Obama & Co., that sees public sector jobs as phony and private sector jobs as real."Yikes... they had to drag poor Doug out of his steam bath to give us this Garfield the Cat act? Why any fee-simple green goo-goo with a paper spike for a head could have... No, I can't bring myself to mete out the rough and proper justice here. I'll just leave you with my favorite line:
"Cash for clunkers was a horrible waste of money. It was financed by raiding funds originally intended for alternative energy research."If this pearlike major brain can't see that his Park Slope take on that majestic piece of corn-plaster showmanship is precisely why "the configuration of popular sentiment" growls and bares its canines whenever it can at passing by pwog ponderations like this... well then... oh, why bother... one either gets it or... one just plain don't.
To cop an adios often favored by SMBIVA's own Madame Xeno, the mordant dryad of Dry Gulch, Oregon: I need one those neighborly beers myself right about now.
Comments (24)
One thing's for sure: cash for clunkers was a horrible idea.
Posted by anxiousmodernman | February 1, 2010 12:33 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 12:33
For the life of me I can't figure out where this commentary is coming from. That aside, I live in Clinton Hill, not Park Slope.
Posted by Doug Henwood | February 1, 2010 1:09 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 13:09
How is this like Garfield?
Posted by Save the Oocytes | February 1, 2010 2:38 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 14:38
I was wondering the same thing.
Posted by MJS | February 1, 2010 2:41 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 14:41
this response
is jaded
cynical
more in love with its own
languor
then the eternal struggle
its a meow
where the answer
ought better to be a roar
even a cowardly lion roar
something that at least gestures
towards fighting back
i love oscar levant
but come october
not so much
--october ?? hell february --
okay okay he's not sterling dingleberry
in fact he's got...like garfield
a nice swat in him now and again
a satin cap cruel streak
he didn't come to yale
a reactionary creep for nothing
Posted by op | February 1, 2010 5:16 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 17:16
we got
your double H boys
harvey and hudson
and err
we got what's his face
humperdink pollin
i bet like
anxiousmodernman
they all want
alternative energy research too
not
that god aweful
coins for clunkers business
----
flash:
back story leak
line excised from original draft of above post
revealed by e mail miss direction
paine wrote :
"and to boot if you read it
(ie the dougwood interview ed.)
i bet most of you snoots out there
prolly will agree with every dang
dainty word of it
Posted by royal paine | February 1, 2010 5:28 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 17:28
What alternative energy research is left, until super cunduction,... it be lookin like nuclear from here on out.
Posted by Son of Uncle Sam | February 1, 2010 5:46 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 17:46
So it's not worth approving my comment even though your post is all about me? Nice little wankfest you run here.
Posted by Doug Henwood | February 1, 2010 7:39 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 19:39
I regret the comment confusion. Crummy software here but I'm pretty much locked in.
Posted by MJS | February 1, 2010 8:55 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 20:55
You got me, officer: I'm with Doug H on the cash for clunkers boondoggle.
I take your point, OP, that it was politically inspired. But just handing out the cash and letting folks keep the clunker would have been inspired too. More inspired, even.
Posted by MJS | February 1, 2010 8:59 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 20:59
Re: Henwood comment.
If such a known entity demands the opportunity to respond, how can the management not grant it? This isn't a branch of the NY Times, is it?
I would be happy to type 'Hillary' for him, if that is the problem!
I note that that IS the problem for me. If one types 'Hillary' and then clicks "preview" and then "post", 'Hillary' has disappeared and the comment goes into the queue for moderation from which it never emerges.
Posted by SMBIVAn Circle Joker | February 1, 2010 9:29 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 21:29
Exactly. That's what happened to Doug's first comment, I think. Sucks, huh? But I haven't been able to find a good way to migrate off this rather clunky software.
Posted by MJS | February 1, 2010 9:43 PM
Posted on February 1, 2010 21:43
Another issue with comments is that it can take a while for them to finish posting, during which if you navigate somewhere else the post often won't go through. Best to copy your response, post, then reload the page to be sure it posted and if not paste it back and try again. Good practice for every forum, I find.
Posted by Sean | February 2, 2010 4:53 AM
Posted on February 2, 2010 04:53
"For the life of me I can't figure out where this commentary is coming from"
we needed a pay roll tax holiday
and a bunch of uncle sponsored state sales tax holidays
and for those states without sales taxes or low sales taxes a reembursement in cash for estimated would be loses
get the people on your side first mistyah doug
then reform em
Posted by op | February 2, 2010 10:53 AM
Posted on February 2, 2010 10:53
op, have you seen Dean "The Dream" Baker's latest on yellow-flag America?
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/op-eds-&-columns/political-constraints-obstructing-us-recovery/
I think it's probably worth a post
Posted by bob | February 2, 2010 11:00 AM
Posted on February 2, 2010 11:00
bob i agree
it's pretty bleak work
the why of the politics is not there
the trail back from the road blocks on the three noticed fronts
to one "group"
that materially benefits from the road blocks
and isn't just "ambitious" and or "corrupt"
ignorant or stupid may explain large hunks of the potential electorate
but not the cuffs manning the policy mechanism itself
Posted by op | February 2, 2010 11:11 AM
Posted on February 2, 2010 11:11
"the why of the politics is not there
the trail back from the road blocks on the three noticed fronts
to one "group"
that materially benefits from the road blocks
and isn't just "ambitious" and or "corrupt""
you should make a new post connecting the dots where Dean leaves off.
Posted by bob | February 2, 2010 11:20 AM
Posted on February 2, 2010 11:20
op--
but not the cuffs manning the policy mechanism itself
"Cuffs"? Is that a reference to a certain birth control pill envisioned by William Gaddis in The Recognitions?
Posted by CF Oxtrot | February 2, 2010 3:04 PM
Posted on February 2, 2010 15:04
that novel ox
and maybe that author
deserve better
then they get
Posted by op | February 2, 2010 3:40 PM
Posted on February 2, 2010 15:40
op, you're singing a song I know well.
he's one of my heroes, and I have very very few heroes. anyone who values personal integrity and a lifelong search for authenticity like Gaddis did... admirable.
I spend most of my life feeling like Edward Bast.
Posted by CF Oxtrot | February 2, 2010 8:37 PM
Posted on February 2, 2010 20:37
Admin suggestion:
Replace
"REQUIRED: Type in Hillary Clinton's first name. This is a spam prevention measure; your comment won't post unless you humor us here."
with
"REQUIRED: Type in Hillary Clinton's first name IMMEDIATELY BEFORE CLICKING "Post". This is a spam prevention measure; your comment won't post unless you humor us here."
Posted by Boink | February 2, 2010 9:39 PM
Posted on February 2, 2010 21:39
Slightly improved admin suggestion:
Replace
"REQUIRED: Type in Hillary Clinton's first name. This is a spam prevention measure; your comment won't post unless you humor us here."
with
"REQUIRED: Type in Hillary Clinton's first name IMMEDIATELY BEFORE CLICKING "Post". Your comment won't post unless you humor us here."
Posted by Boink | February 2, 2010 11:52 PM
Posted on February 2, 2010 23:52
Gosh, I hope Henwood doesn't read THESE comments!
Talk about wankfests!
Posted by Boink | February 3, 2010 1:29 PM
Posted on February 3, 2010 13:29
OOPS , wrong thread!!!
Posted by Boink | February 3, 2010 1:30 PM
Posted on February 3, 2010 13:30