Friedman Makes Sense

October 17th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Thomas Friedman is one of the few New York Times columnists I do not merely respect and enjoy reading, but with whom I actually agree quite often (yes, I’m one of those people who can actually respect a person and enjoy his writings when I disagree with him on virtually every issue). One of his latest columns is called “The Post-Binge World.” In it, Friedman takes a closer look at the current crisis in the financial markets and the economy in general, trying to explain what exactly is going on.

“At their core, markets are propelled by fear and greed. They’re just the balance at any given moment of those two impulses. Over the long run, you cannot spin the market. You cannot sweet talk it into going up or beg it not to go down. It’s going to do whatever it’s going to do — whichever way greed and fear tug it. And the market always bats last and it always bats a thousand,” he wrote.

“We are where we are today because we went on a credit binge and we’re now paying the price. Because it was the biggest credit binge the world has ever been on, a lot of wealth is going to be wiped out. Now what you’re witnessing is the market re-evaluating and re-pricing every asset in the world, without mercy, telling each stock, bond and bank what its value is in a post-credit binge world.”

In another one of his latest columns, Friedman added: “You cannot tell tens of thousands of people that they can have the American dream… without that eventually catching up to you.”

Now, although some may assume that he meant that the idea of the American Dream itself is subject of criticism by Friedman, the following part that I excluded from the above quote has to be cited and explained: “a home, for no money down and nothing to pay for two years.”

That is exactly what was wrong in the last ten to twenty years: not the idea of the American Dream as such, but the idea that this Dream could become reality, that it could be achieved, without people paying the price for it. The American Dream used to mean that you would work hard, act responsible, save your earnings, invest wisely, and then reach the top.

In the past one to two decades, however, too many people have distorted ideal of the American Dream; it came to mean having it all, without doing anything for it. Living above your means. Earning $30,000 a year, but living as you earned $100,000. Consuming more, in other words, than you produced.

In the end, this is what truly caused today’s crisis. This real cause cannot, I fear, be solved by the government alone. Rather, it will take individual members of society and society as a whole, to prevent similar crisis from occurring in the coming years: it requires a dramatic change in (popular) culture, and in the way people think about themselves, their families, and life in general.

That is what this crisis is truly, fundamentally, about. It’s cultural.

Unless politicians address this issue, and articulate it properly (even if that would cause them to lose support among the masses), all efforts to revive the economy and to rebuild into a stronger, more stable one will be in vain.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.