Elwood P Dowd's Journal: Is this a setup?

A quote from an interview with the author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man":

So, let's say we give this third-world country a loan of $1 billion. One of the conditions of that loan is that the majority of it, roughly 90%, comes back to the United States to one of our big corporations, the ones we've all heard of recently, the Bechtels, the Halliburtons. And those corporations build in this third-world country large power plants, highways, ports, or industrial parks -- big infrastructure projects that basically serve the very rich in those countries. The poor people in those countries and the middle class suffer; they don't benefit from these loans, they don't benefit from the projects. In fact, often their social services have to be severely curtailed in the process of paying off the debt. Now what also happens is that this third-world country then is saddled with a huge debt that it can't possibly repay. For example, today, Ecuador. Ecuador's foreign debt, as a result of the economic hit man, is equal to roughly 50% of its national budget. It cannot possibly repay this debt, as is the case with so many third-world countries. So, now we go back to those countries and say, look, you borrowed all this money from us, and you owe us this money, you can't repay your debts, so give our oil companies your oil at very cheap costs.

And that leaves me curious. Is there any reason this wouldn't work on the United States? I mean, sure, we're way richer than Ecuador, so it would take a whole hell of a lot more debt to sink 50% of our federal budget, but it's not like Bechtel or Halliburton are going after Ecuador because it's foreign. They go after third world countries because they are easier to get ahold of. Their government is easier to corrupt and their economy is easier to own. There's no America-World Bank-Halliburton team. Given enough cooperation from our government, I bet they could sink us just the same.

Afterward, I read this Slate article about fiscal conservatives getting the shaft.

I suppose it's obvious how that Katrina rebuilding money is going to get spent. Some of it will go to poor people who lost their shit, but way more of it will go to property owners who lost more expensive shit. They will rebuild, and they won't necessarily need to focus on low cost housing. (That way there won't be any poor people in New Orleans...) The majority will go to government contractors. Halliburton may be planning exactly the kinds of ultra-expensive and unnecessary projects that they used to stick up Latin America. Anyone out there have a television? I can't find any sweeping narratives about where the cash will go.

Maybe not. Maybe they'll build a hurricane-proof elevated train. They could build it out of silk and diamonds for their part of the $200 billion. What did it cost for Bechtel to build BART?

So what's the point of the $1 trillion war in Iraq, the $145 billion drug company handout, the $260 billion highway bill, and $200 billion for Katrina aid ($200,000 per person! To Halliburton!)? How about the reduction in taxes worth $2.2 trillion over 10 years? We'll have over a $500 billion deficit this year. This isn't even Reaganomics. No one has argued that this combination of reduced taxation and deficit spending will improve our economy so much that we can afford all this shit. Way to fucking go, "conservatives".

Putting two and two together, I would like to suggest the possibility that our wealthy elite are conspiring to pull off an "economic hit" on us. I bet they could do it. They already are the government.

Debt

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Here's something far more likely- within the next 40 years, China will own the United States and we'll all be slaves.

You see, those huge corporations are currently spending more than they earn. On average, $150 for every $100 they earn. They have been for 40 years now- that's what a "trade deficit" MEANS! In the end- they have all the cash, and we're struggling to make our debt payments. The governmental debt is nothing- the consumer debt is far in excess of that. "Gross Domestic Product" hides this b

Read that book.

[grub]

I finished Confessions of... a couple of weeks ago. Decent book but he gets a bit preachy near the end. Still worth the read.

Re:Read that book.

[sporktoast]

Of course he gets preachy toward the end. What did you expect? "Here's how bad things are. Here's how I helped to start us the road to how bad things are. Here's how things are likely to get worse. The end." It's not like just confessing is enough. He really is repentant of his misdeeds. And part of repenting is to give an earnest effort to make ammends for your mistakes. Merely describing the situation at hand is not enough.

I'll probably be buying this book for a few friends. The contract aid mo

Re:Read that book.

[grub]

When I bought the book I expected raw facts. What he supplies are his own stories and anecdotes, not much verifiable data. Not that I disbelieve the man, I think what he says is straight up but it comes across as a bit whiny near the end. Watch the interview with him on democracynow.org, same thing.

It's not criticism of what he did or what he's doing, just an observation of how he comes across to me. Nothing more.

Not conspiring, just doing business

[sporktoast]

Putting two and two together, I would like to suggest the possibility that our wealthy elite are conspiring to pull off an "economic hit" on us. I bet they could do it. They already are the government.

They don't HAVE to conspire. They are just working the system as it is, and operating for their own shared economic self-interest. "Look, there's a LOT of BIG work to be done. We're *obviously* the best candidates for the job, so there's no need for competition. And it makes sense for us to secure for our