Thanks so much for all the thoughtful and often detailed comments on our post yesterday, Memo to Readers: If You Want to Beat Big Finance, You Need to be Able to Take the Fight to Their Terrain. We are all looking for avenues and leverage points to reduce the power of Big Finance in our economy and increasingly in our communities. You gave us a lot of insight into what we are doing that works for you and what we might consider doing that would be more effective.
It was very helpful to see so many first time and infrequent commentors weigh in since hearing from those of you who don’t often speak up gives us a much better perspective. Moreover, it was gratifying as well as instructive to see how many of you are carrying the things you learn at NC and other sites to other audiences, like your children and grandchildren, local officials, and people in your Facebook groups. We also got more input from other readers, as well as allies, via e-mail.
What we saw is that despite the legitimate concern that some voiced over whether it is effective to take the fight to the banksters’ terrain, even more seem to accept it as a viable approach, even if it is often hard to observe progress. Many readers, including those who wrote to us privately, did confirm that they read the denser posts and value them highly even if they don’t feel the need to pipe up in comments as much as on other material. And quite a few readers approved of our urging readers, as we have on fights where we think input from citizens can make a difference, like on the Fast Track/TPP battle in Congress, to provide links and guidance as to how to make your voice heard, and encouraged us to come up with more concrete action items.
If you haven’t had time to give us your point of view, it’s not too late to tell us what you think. Lambert and I both went through the comments so far and had a long discussion of how to incorporate your ideas and views into our work. While we’d like to be able to use all good suggestions, we are resource-constrained. Whether we can implement some suggestions also depends on whether the right technology tools exist. We’ll be getting back to you over the next month with further thoughts and preliminary plans to obtain additional reader input. Some did point out that I’ve gotten rougher with members of the commentariat over time and that that’s a deterrent for some. I recognize that I have gotten more impatient and sharp-edged, particularly in combatting defeatism as a meme, and I will work at refraining from wheeling out the heavy artillery too early and often.
Finally, two readers told us about how they had lost their homes to the meat grinder of HAMP mods. I can’t imagine how devastating that would be. Yet despite suffering such huge personal losses, they have not given up. As crittermom said:
Yet the more I find out, the madder I am, as well. As a victim, I sign petitions, & scream at the injustice brought upon us citizens & allowed (encouraged?), by a govt that no longer represents us.
Even if you have limited personal resources, if you have time, there are things you can do to educate yourself and the people around you. Knowledge is a necessary foundation for action, no matter what type of action you decide in the end to take. And more important than the particular information we convey is in reminding readers that other seemingly powerful oligarchies have fallen due to their own short-sightedness and indifference to the needs of broader communities, which, despite their pretenses otherwise, they really do depend. As the financiers’ hypersensitivity to criticism attests, they are vulnerable, even if people like us have yet to find the right leverage points. So we continue to value your input and participation in this effort to effect change.
67 comments
Comments are closed.
I’d like to echo some of the other comments by saying I very much appreciate this site and everything you bring to it. However, like some others mentioned, I get lost with some of the terminology and/or acronym usage. It took me a while to understand IIRC (if I recall correctly) since I do not use that in my own vernacular. Likewise, it gets hard to follow the financial jargon when reading one of the technical financial posts that gets deep in the weeds of finance shenanigans. As others pointed out yesterday, some kind of glossary of terms would be helpful. Additionally, the in-depth financial posts are hard for me to stick with because, practically speaking, they are a wall of words. If they could be broken up with some bullet points of main ideas so that I’d have something to fall back to when trying to understand the info in a given paragraph or possibly a basic graphic to illustrate the point of a given section, it would be easier for me to recapitulate the information in my own mind and then post a comment. It sometimes feels like having a bunch of puzzle pieces without any idea of how to put the pieces together or at least not being really sure if the puzzle I put together was the one you were trying to get across.
I made a suggestion a while back about using the information you have provided in these finance articles about various frauds taking place and turn it into a sort of rolling brief to prepare for the next crisis. Maybe that is a way to get more participation from commenters. A sort of crowd sourced brief focusing on 2 or 3 areas going on right now where readers can find info, examples, and begin undercutting the lies that will be used to excuse the next round of financial collapse.
That in conjunction with help from some of your guest posts, like Bill Black, would be awesome. That is I think the thing that angers people the most about the 2008 crisis, that the information was all out there, but no one put it together and now people are only putting it together in piecemeal fashion after the fact while the criminals got off scott free. I would greatly relish watching the elites try to justify not doing anything when you could publicly show a brief that was produced in advance undercutting every excuse for criminality and the lack of accountability. You can’t claim ‘no one could have foreseen that’ when you can point to something made in advance. Something like that would make a lot of us who have felt apathetic about these finance schemes feel like we were doing something, which is what you want.
A glossary is a great idea, and an NC community-created wiki is the first thing that comes to mind, as far as how it might be able to happen.
I didn’t comment yesterday but will today. I am in the same camp generally as the commenter above. I too appreciate the in-depth articles, even when I am way out of my own depth and have to look up terms or do a bit of background research to even understand the gist. I would go further (selfishly) than asking for a glossary. I would love some kind of bibliography that could be seen as a collection of really good primers on understanding these issues. Like “A brief History of Time” or “Why Evolution is true” for Finance, relating to economics, geopolitics, etc. It’s even difficult for me to list the areas of interest, because I don’t think I understand enough to know what to ask (unknown unknowns :–). To be more general, Finance as it relates to why the hell we can’t have a more sane, sustainable world? I have read Taibbi, Prins, David Kay Johnston and some others, but besides an abiding simmering outrage and constant amazement at the greed of our species, I don’t fully understand how to connect the dots between the issues we all face and certainly don’t know what I can do besides supporting political candidates I like and sites like yours, Democracy Now, Real News Network, etc.
Very cool to see Yves’s TPP Op-Ed at Truth-out too! It is shown on the page above Krugman’s!
Keep up the great work Yves & Lambert et al (DD etc)!
One question implied seems to be how NC and its readers are having a measurable impact in various contexts (aside from obvious evidence like citations in the media etc.).
I usually think of and read NC as more of an econ think-tank than a media outlet.
It could be interesting to offer more direct assessments from time to time, say where readers could volunteer to respond to surveys (survey monkey pro package has modest data crunching integration). It could be fun for readers to be voluntary participant observers in strategic polling data. Maybe such data would be valuable “market” research that could be leveraged to support NC?
Nice thoughtful post Yves. The reminder that the powers that be do have vulnerabilities and dependencies was helpful.
And I wouldn’t be too overly concerned about that sharp-edged tongue of yours in comments. When I scroll comments, I particularly zone in on your replies, especially with the recent Greek crisis.
Cheers,
jb
It’s good to take stock and take note of criticism. Otherwise, you just encourage sycophants, which is a bit boring and potentially insensitive. For some, a sharp tongue (or snark) is off-putting, and I’m glad that criticism was aired. I don’t see that as elevating the discussion, at least not for more sensitive types who can feel hurt by it.
I too enjoy the provided depth in the articles even though I am not an American citizen.
One of the ideas that go through my head lately is a procedure that allows the failure of decision makers (especially those in the area of public service who generally enjoying a great degree of immune-like status) to be subjected to public ridicule, similar to the way Giuliani used the “perp walk” for criminals or Loretta Lynch is now “perp walking” the Fifa president. It would work as a platform for a kind of informal prosecution by the public with the purpose for the concerned individuals to lose their face, become society’s outcasts. The problem is probably to achieve the necessary popularity of such a internet-site. It would have to be focused in such a way that the concerned rule makers’ and breakers’ cases are sufficiently coherent, complete and still rather easy to comprehend. A voting system showing the public’s disgust would show their “popularity” and allow a ranking that may make it into the mass media.
I would love to see some public shaming of the (alas, shameless) perps who are gaming the system
and getting away with it as well as those (equally shameless) decision makers who are turning a blind eye.
The internet is a village square where we can expose these anti-social miscreants and create an ongoing
archive of their crimes.
How about an Internet Perp Walk feature for NC: each week (or day, if resources permit) might feature
a different perp, with a list of their bad behavior?
A start? At the very least, it will create an archive for future reference.
As a public high school math teacher in my 10th year in Seattle, as a 55 year know nobody in career 3, as a voter in HOPE ak and HOPE 2008 who will never ever listening to 1 of those lying neo-lib yuppie sell out scum again – we want to change their selfish lying behavior, we gotta be out front of their homes.
SOMEDAY, that little itty bitty rule or regulation or law delta which extends some privilege to some living large parasite will be hyper linked to the a-holes who wrote it, their home addresses, the count of people affected, and the count of pennies taken per 2080 working hours of the year.
Whether the issue is some underhanded barely decipherable neo-lib ploy to destroy public another piece of public education, OR, another underhanded barely decipherable wall street trick to rip us all off – one or some humans wrote it and pushed it and EVERYONE outta know.
Finally, in the interest of being moderate and centrist, I am willing to advocate for 10 year minimum sentences pounding rocks when you rip off more than 10 members of the community. I’d really prefer my 10, 11, 12 Stadium Justice, but … we all gotta compromise!
(Saturday At The Stadium – Trials at 10, thumbs up / thumbs down, Hungry lions & bears & tigers at 11, going home by noon. )
rmm
I saw that wikileaks has helpfully provided secret TISA documents for public viewing. Now that many of these secret documents from the TPP, TISA, and TTIP are available for public inspection I’m kind of interested in seeing how they all tie together. Unless all this is just a random grab bag of corporate-state wishlists the Obama regime is trying to shove on the world as quickly as possible and there is no over-arching theme. Looking forward to seeing those posts.
Also I’m really curious about what you all think comes after we put the bankers in jail, bring equality to society, achieve social justice, etc. Because if the point is to resume economic growth and return to business as usual–then I can do without all that. Our society has to radically change if we’re to have a viable future, and I think forcing/allowing a horrific crisis to come about is one of the few ways such change could actually happen.
There is and coming tech which would alleviate a lot of problems, planned obsolescence ended, by its self would be a massive change.
The goal should be to revamp corporate law and culture to mirror Mondragon. Growth and profit must take a back seat to sustainability and social good. Society before profit. No such thing as “Too Big to Fail” in ANY endeavor. All banks and finance firms should be REQUIRED to be “Too Small to Matter” so when they die, so what?
I think I’m on board with that.
As for a horrific crisis of the economic sort bringing on change, I think if that were going to happen it would have happened in 2008 and at one point I may have believed it would have, but it didn’t. How could it with all the bailout money in the world propping things up? Global capitalism is entirely backstopped (free market – tell me another one). The reaction to crisis is just for the elite to take anything where only the little guy really suffers. The system hums around more or less, while more and more homeless appear in our streets etc.. You would think the system couldn’t continue with mass impoverishment, but of course it can. Then our economic desperation is used to sell us even more planet destroying activities, you need jobs don’t you (they’ll ask us with 20% joblessness) support fracking your backyard then!
Would it be considered a criminal matter donating to the 100000 $ reward for the entirety of the TPP text.
Once all the obstructors were successfully contained and neutralized, we would be free to pursue equitable de-growth and with the little physical wealth remaining, install viable society-wide survivalist infrastructure; such as train-travel in and between semi-densely settled areas ( as existed in America till about 1920 or so), the massive re-insulation of houses/buildings/etc. for energy conservation, etc.
It’s actually fairly amazing, and very important to recognize, that Wikileaks is *permanently up* and *accessible from nearly every country with internet*. China’s still censoring, but the fact that they’re censoring it is readily readable *from China* on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websites_blocked_in_mainland_China …
Given that Wikileaks has alienated nearly every one of the old-line corrupt powerbases, regardless of whether they like each other or not, its durability indicates the slow collapse of those powerbases’ ability to control information.
First of all, thank you for providing the insights on the economy and finance through this site, as well as links to places which provide more information and background.
Secondly, I will confess that, although I have read through the posts on the problems with the private equity – public pension/other public money connection, it did not seem to me to be as central an issue as, for example, the mortgage fraud/foreclosure fraud issue, probably because I can see the direct connection of the latter to the lives of some of my clients.
However, after reading your post yesterday and your follow-up today, I have tried to put the information you have provided on private equity together with other information, particularly the use of pension fund money as the source of short term funding for the bond market.
I know that connection is not the one you were referring to, but it occurs to me that a post at the macro level which places pension fund assets within the larger context of the pool of resources used by both private equity and money market dealers/players in the financial system and how that, in turn, poses risks to the real economy might be useful.
There are some indirect references to it from Perry Mehrling and in this presentation by zoltan poszar, but making that connection explicit here would be useful to the general reader.
Good suggestion. I’d like to better understand that connection.
Perhaps related, I wonder how much government purported support of innovative companies, that takes the form of equity investment with decisions channeled through PE companies large and small, is just window-dressing for a way to transfer wealth to the financial services industry. (Friends in Ireland described how the government’s “helpful” equity investment process is often outsourced to VC firms. The VC firms come out well through their fees. The innovative companies who are supposedly being “helped”–not so much.)
I’ve noticed every few months Yves has a Diva Eruption and needs a shot of love juice from the Peanut Gallery. Sometimes it’s hard love, but that’s the best kind.
I’m sending $100 by check tonight. If 10 other people can commit to send $100, she can go to Paul Stuart and buy this white buttoned front textured cotton blend cardigan.
https://www.paulstuart.com/women-s/white-button-front-textured-cotton-blend-cardigan.html
She would look hot!
In terms of activism and action, it’s hopeless for most of us. We’re way too lazy for that. I’ve had to come to terms with that, in myself, after a painful process of intense self-criticism and soul flagellation. I’ve had to accept it, I’m catatonically lazy and completely ineffectual when it comes to any sort of organized, concerted action. About the only thing I’m capable of is sitting around like a vegetable with movies streaming in my mind. That’s why I’m in the peanut gallery and the Posters here are men and women of capacity and action. But we do what we can!
Perhaps you should be doing a John Stewart?
Humor is one of the most powerful means of persuasion, and you’re very good at it.
Yeah, I know: that’s work.
Crazyman, you manage to convey fun, humour, and a non-pc spirit in just the right doses, if you ask me. I always read your posts.
It makes me ill to be an activist, because I’m an introvert and activism is extroverted. I do it anyway because I feel compelled.
Yves;
Thank you so much for your site–Naked Capitalism. My world would be so much less informative without it. Your knowledge and expertise is breathtaking. In this day and age of dumbed down content and pictures NC, with its meaty content and super smart commentators is a welcome daily addiction. I write about political/economy at–Camelotkidd.com, and link to NC all the time.
Good luck with the blog. The more, the better on these topics. Why no comment section?
For me, thanks to Yves’ blog here, it’s a matter of now I really know how much I’m taking it in the shorts as opposed to I suspect I’m taking it in the shorts, but I can’t say for certain!
Ignorance really isn’t bliss, I’d prefer to know than not know.
I didn’t get in on the conversation in the previous post, but I wanted to add my appreciation for the work you do and the insights I have gained from NC. While I am a long-time reader (and some time tip jar contributor), this is my first comment. I guess I just want to say thanks and that you shouldn’t assume that lack of comments from readers like myself equates to lack of impact. While I haven’t been in on the comments here, I am contacting my congress-critter and doing what I can elsewhere on important issues like TPP — issues that your analyses give me the ammunition to speak effectively about.
Just adding that I come here, as so many others do, to read explanations of economic theory (such as it is), regulation, and Mr. Market. I finally am understanding spreads after a posting by Lambert the other day. Italian media talk about spreads all the time–it’s a national joke that turns up even at satirical sites–but no one has explained spreads as well as you do. And that’s just one for-instance.
Many of the commenters pointed out that their backgrounds don’t allow them to critique the articles on economics or regulation. We are here as students. My background is in the humanities. So my (very limited) training in economics has been through reading “popularizers” like Naomi Klein or Norberto Bobbio–but they are what you’d call political economists. (Plus a dose of poor, misguided Nate Silver and his love of “free markets.”)
As to zinging the commentariat:
“Some did point out that I’ve gotten rougher with members of the commentariat over time and that that’s a deterrent for some. I recognize that I have gotten more impatient and sharp-edged, particularly in combatting defeatism as a meme, and I will work at refraining from wheeling out the heavy artillery too early and often.”
Yves’s comments on misperceptions among commenters of how the Greek crisis is playing out have been as valuable as the main posts. Lambert’s comments against conspiracy theorists are refreshing, and they reset the basis of discussion, as have his comments on Hillary Clinton and policy, policy, policy. Such kinds of comments have helped to keep the comments at this site at the highest quality. Tart? We are living in tart times. But have you ever gone to a news site, especially after an article about Obama or a prominent woman or a black teen murdered by police has been posted? It’s the national id on display. Spewing spewing spewing, of the lowest kind. So if you tell commenters at times to back off, it lifts the level of discussion. Just as tartness can clear the palate, so too tartness can redirect the discussion to a better place. We are all adults here, I assume.
I for one, am glad Yves now recognizes that at times she was “wheeling out the heavy artillery too early and often”.
No, I would not want this place to turn in to a free-for-all, but I don’t want it to turn into an echo-chamber either.
I am all for good debate, with informed commenters, who have an array of different ideas. I am all for good discussion on the pros and cons of all those different ideas.
I will be much more informed if I am given the opportunity to know what the options are and come to my own conclusions, rather than have one and only one conclusion handed to me.
Well said. Sometimes I feel like I’m going to a high school where the popular kids are smarter than average, but wield out the snark which doesn’t always elevate the level of discussion. Don’t confuse verbal might with right.
I don’t even want a society where the smart people rule everything (technocracy?), I want a more egalitarian society. The thing is everyone isn’t going to be able to do everything in terms of jobs etc., but I’m not sure our government and everything else should mirror that. However, a better society may be unlikely to be realized with current levels of ignorance (and the national ID – I’ve seen it as well – truly unbelievable).
But in some sense it’s unfair to even call it ignorance, yes but …. it’s the result of absolute massive propaganda. People are born ignorant, but not in that way.
I suppose we are all ignorant to a certain extent, huddling in Plato’s cave, barely grasping reality. Just learning about how African Americans have been swindled out of equitable mortages (from an NC link — thank you!) is enough of a reminder that it’s hard to keep on top of all of the injustice.
Another thought on the paucity of comments on NC’s more finance intensive posts.
I have only attempted to come to an understanding of economics since 2008. At that time, I tried to understand some basic market fundamentals, etc. Much of the information on topics such as this are academic and describe how markets/finance work in an ideal state. After gaining a rudimentary understanding, I tried to follow current events, only to be confused by the disconnect with what was supposed to happen given certain financial events and what was actually happening.
How many times was I presented with a blog post, article, etc. stating that an event would certainly occur if A,B,&C all happened, only to see that no such event occurred. This pattern held true regardless of whether the topic was sovereign default (i.e. PIGS), stock market overvaluation/correction, etc,etc.. After a while, this becomes extremely disorienting, and the ability to focus on it mentally becomes very difficult.
What can a person say on a financial topic when they are so confused? We have a system now that does not fit the system that most of our terms work with. Ours is now a heavily centrally planned/controlled system, to which many of these financial concepts seem not to apply, since the central planners can come in at any time to move the goalposts and redefine terms at will.
After a while, the head just explodes. NC is great at trying to shine a light in the darkness, but you must realize that many of the people here are at a stage of still needing their hands held through all of this and are not ready to stand on their own to make grand pronouncements as far as finance/economics goes, whatever that is these days.
Keep up the great work, keep your head up, and try to be a bit more patient (and less condescending at times, for lack of better words) with those of us hanging on the ragged edge of understanding.
tim,
So here’s my OPINION — economics and finance wants to be a hard science but in reality is at best a social science. What does that mean?
Heat a pot of water and it will change state from liquid to steam. Cool a pot of water and it will change state from liquid to solid. Today, tomorrow, and for the next 10,000,000 years.
Now let’s look at economics. If the Federal Reserve announced a 1/4% increase in short term interest rates tomorrow, what will happen? Realistically, you can’t answer that question except in the most general way (e.g. interest rates will be higher – and there are some things that do mechanistically flow from that). But more specifically, it’s not a question that can be answered. There are possibilities and probabilities, but no fixed, immutable response beyond trivial observations.
Economics and the economy consist of a ridiculously large number of relationships which are not mechanistic but are reflexive (what I do depends on what you do which depends on what I do, etc. in an almost “hall of mirrors” manner). However, many people treat them as mechanistic, which leads to pronouncements. If you’ve never heard the forecaster advice – predict what or predict when, but not both — it sums up the issue. And the reward for a dramatic and correct pronouncement is fantastic but the penalty for a dramatic but incorrect pronouncement is trivial or nonexistent.
Hence your confusion (and the prognosticators are VERY polished and VERY sure of themselves)
So in short there are very few mechanistic “laws” (although we try to pretend economics is a rough approximation to physics). Arcane language and complex mathematics are frequently used to obscure what are banal concepts (#5 below is about “negotiation and information asymmetry”. Somewhat flippantly, here are a few (and some are paraphrased):
1) What can’t go on forever will eventually end (Herb Stein)
2) The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent (Keynes)
3) In the long run, we’re all dead (Keynes, again)
4) Don’t put all your eggs in one basket (can’t remember who but won a Nobel for that)
5) The used car dealer knows more than the used car customer (Nobel worthy as well)
6) If you don’t have a data set and can’t run a regression, the idea doesn’t exist (that’s mine).
Keep reading and don’t worry if you don’t understand everything. And never forget that half the time prognosticators are “talking their book”.
I didn’t get a chance to comment on the previous post, but I’d like to say that I very much appreciate the work done on this site. I read pretty much every article as my time permits. I sometimes scan the comment section for additional insights, but rarely have the time to comment myself. Please do not lose heart. Continue the great work you are doing.
Despite NC’s financial focus, it has become my primary news site. Although I read the postings and links to become informed, my reaction to the observations, fact sets, or opinions rarely varies from “hmm–not surprising.” What’s to comment on when everybody agrees? It is only when I see something strongly objectionable, or sense a misdiagnosis on a particular case, that I feel compelled to comment. Another way to cultivate comments is to identify a curious phenomenon, and create open-ended, speculative posts where you present the facts as you know them, and allow the commenters to speculate about an explanation. This is more interactive, and requires more creativity on the part of the commentariat–which many if not most (probably most) would enjoy. A community jigsaw puzzle, if you will, that draws the readership together. As to wielding more policy power, I’d point to the FCC’s recent net neutrality brouhaha, and generally positive win for the public good. The outcome was tipped in our favor when the FCC was deluged with public comments 1,000-to-one in favor of net neutrality. Change like this does not come quickly, nor easily, and it is seldom accomplished singlehanded by one website. If you want a particular policy outcome, it would be well to identify possible allies, and coordinate activities to cow our public officials. A broader coalition in service to a particular cause will usually get more accomplished than an ideologically pure Cassandra organization. Take TPP/TTIP for instance. There are many legitimate, traditional objections to those agreements from otherwise diametrically-opposed political groups: If only they could agree to work together to defeat this specific authorization/negotiation. That would require knowing other people in the blogosphere, being able to create a coalition, agreeing to specific actions, and mobilizing the troops.
Despite this, we sometimes still lose. Example: although the overwhelming majority of the public–and congress–opposed bank bailout legislation, it eventually passed. And some of the same bad actors keep popping up, like Steny Hoyer. We have to be able to bring consequences to bear on legislators like that. Drag them into the mud, scratch their faces, make them radioactive to their own congressional districts, ensure their staffers never get jobs in DC again. That last one is particularly effective when staffers get the idea that their slow boat to lobbyist Shangri-La is turning out to be a pair of cement galoshes. But politics is not bean-bag, and unless you’re willing to engage in it, in a methodical, calculated, and creative ways, you’ll never excise the entrenched establishmentarian cankers that are Steny Hoyer et al., and unless you get rid of them and replace them with Elizabeth Warrens, it’s difficult to steer the policy prerogatives away from where we are now.
I have been coming to this site regularly for 5+ years, and nearly every day for most of that period. However, this is probably only the 4th or 5th time I have commented. I seldom read comments, due to limited time, but they are of high quality, and I should read more. Most days I share 5 – 20 links and a good portion of articles found here on multple FB / Twitter accounts. I occasionally write in my blog (which not many people read), and attend community actions when I can. In my involvement with our local OWS group, and thousands of hours spent online in the past few years, It seems many / most otherwise intelligent people have trouble following financial shenanigans which I think are simple and straightforward. As such, I try to simplify things and show how these things affect normal people (FWIW). This site is the hands down best daily spot to get information IMHO. Keep up the good work.
I’m a regular reader of NC & I have a question for other fans of this blog:
How do you avoid or deal with “outrage fatigue”?
Once you discover that the underlying causes are usually mindsets and ideologies and self-interested groups then it is not so fatiguing or so daunting. You can also see through the strawmen, misdirection and other devices used to prevent people from understanding and addressing those root causes.
=
=
=
H O P
Having been raised in a agriculture based family business, I’ve long had a strong sense of the power of debt and how it can be quite a slippery slope for those who are not careful, so it has been my sense that this country went over that edge with Reagan and while it has taken thirty five years for us to reach the end of the rope, it has been an obvious and evident process to anyone really sitting back and understanding the big picture.
While the surface of that expanding bubble has been an exciting and technologically dynamic area, the debts accumulated/promises made, were of the sort that could never be paid down and so while many are caught in the grinder, both as cogs in the gears and fodder being fed into it, I don’t see the need to work within this system, so much as outlast it, even if through my child.
As such, one of the main points I feel which need to be emphasized, is that at its most fundamental level, money is a social contract, not the commodity capitalism has come to treat it as and as such, is a form of economic medium and public utility, just like a system of roads. Not the private property we are trained to think of it as.
So that when this system does break down, different communities are going to have to introduce their own voucher systems and there needs to be an education process that these monetary devices are not property to be hoarded, as they function like blood in the body and it is that very hoarding which eventually breaks them down.
People can accumulate real assets, or develop strong community structure, or healthy environments, as stores of value, but simply building up excess promises from the rest of the economy doesn’t work, when everyone else wants them as well. This public desire and fascination with money is the source of the power of the banks.
Much of what they do that is corrupt, is to create the illusion of far more notational value than the real economy can support. Then knowing it is all a bubble of illusion, cheating becomes a natural impulse.
So my point here is that on this very day, we have an article on the consequences of Greece going back to a local currency and that is what needs to be discussed and debated. Yes, there are many weaknesses to local currencies, much as the local store is weak, compared to Walmart, but they also have the advantage of circulating value around in that local community and making those connections stronger and not just being atomized units in some global economy.
We don’t need to understand every aspect of this global bubble, just that to replace it will be a bottom up and difficult process, but the only viable solution.
Adding to the thanks expressed by so many for exhortations to action, I’d like to say thank you specifically for yesterday’s link to the Wikileaks pledge page: https://wikileaks.org/pledge/.
I was delighted to be able to add my pledge to the Wikileaks Prize for Understanding Good Government that will be awarded to anyone who can leak the remaining 26 chapters of the TPP still locked in secrecy.
I have nothing to say that has not already been said in one way or another in the comment threads on this post and on the the post asking for responses from your readers, but I would still like to take this opportunity to thank you Yves (and Lambert!) for your work. I value nakedcapitalism very, very highly and, for want of time, try to read most articles that I can easily make sense of and at least just skim the (often more technical) articles which my missing background in anything related to economics or finance, or more generally business, prevents me from understanding well enough. This by no means means that you should you post less of these technical articles, though. Keep them going!
Because I oftentimes find myself lacking in sufficient background knowledge I feel I usually do not have anything to add to the discussion, so I hardly comment at all (I have commented only two or three times, possibly under a different name). I really wish I could learn the background knowledge necessary for a better understand of the topics discussed on this website. To this end I have made a long and ever-growing list of books that I would like to read including Yves’ book, books by Varoufakis and Phillip Mirowski, The Economics Anti-Textbook, Classics in Post-Keynsianism, Galbraith, The MMT primer etc. etc. But unfortunately I have not found the time and energy to get started on my reading project.
As a foreign grad student I am not in a position to press much for significant changes in American society, but I try to spread the word about the looting by much of the “elites” and have sent friends articles from nakedcapitalism. I will think of what more I could do in the future.
Nakedcapitalism stands alone for its coverage of the criminal and political economy of the financial class. Please know that the excellent work you do is appreciated!
Should have proofread my comment before posting it. Sorry for the garbled sentences!
I am one of those who hesitate to comment in the more technical economic/financial posts.
Reading NC for a few years now has helped me become confident in explaining neoliberlaism to my friends and relatives. I do see the need to educate myself more on QE and PE and other areas so I will feel competent enough to post in those threads.
Thanks NC for being here.
I also hesitate to comment in the more complex posts because I don’t feel I have much to offer. I suppose I could just comment: “Heck yeah!” or “Hear, hear!” or something like that. But I like the high quality comments on this site and hesitate to add noise to the signal.
For other posts about corruption and crooked executives, regulators, politicians and so forth, once again I’m not sure what I would comment. Long-term readers of this site are all well aware of what a useless stupid pack of greedy, grubbing chimpanzees lord themselves atop our society. What can I add other than, “Terrible atrocity. But not surprised”?
I think this is why I see more use in calls to action, or at least providing contact details or links to a comment form.
I greatly appreciate the reporting that’s done here.
My first “real” ventures into trying to understand the worlds of finance and economics began with the Crash. While attempting to understand this new language of CDO’s, CLO’s, repo, CDS, etc., I stumbled upon Naked Capitalism, and my worldview has not been the same since. I, by no means, consider myself fully literate, but after years of reading the posts (and the amazing comments – hat tip to the NC commentariat!) I at least have an inkling of the circus that is modern finance, economics and government.
Thanks for all that Yves, Lambert and the numerous others that have created such a valuable resource!
I, too, am a lurker and do not post. But I read the site every day and I take what I learn and I infect anyone who will listen to me. Recently that meant explaining rent extraction to one co-worker, and debating another about how the minimum wage needs to be increased.
I frequently drop bombs like, “there is no such thing as a free market” and watch as others cringe in horror. I may not convince everyone of my positions, but I know I get them to start thinking, and thinking is dangerous to a closed mind. :)
I find it amazing that my friends, family, and co-workers blindly accept the neoliberal crapification of everything around them. As a father with a kid entering kindergarten I’m particularly bummed out by what’s happening with the perpetual underfunding of public education combined with the implementation of Common Core. (I am a big supporter of Diane Ravitch.) But that’s another story…
For the most part, I find the comments here *incredibly* useful. Whenever someone mentions a book, I add it to my reading list and borrow it from my local library. These books I would never have read before I started following this site.
Because of my increased knowledge, I feel like I can effectively debate most political, economic and social issues with logic and with some data to back me up. This is incredibly fulfilling to me intellectually. I know I won’t convince the die-hards, but that’s not my goal. I’m more interested in presenting a strong counter-argument to religiously held positions (e.g. the government is like a household).
As others have said, I don’t comment because my comments would mostly be “piling on” type comments. I really don’t have that much to add to the discussion. But I certainly appreciate the discussion!
You do have much to add to the discussion—you express yourself very well. Hope to see more of your comments in future.
Yves and NC are a pure delight. I’m staying with it till I die with my boots on. And enjoy every minute.
Yves,
I didn’t add my voice to the chorus yesterday . . . only because so many expressed my POV. As a layperson (NO economics education) I prize the information and insight I get not only from your articles, but from the thoughtful opinions expressed in response. I also feel my inarticulate questions would serve little purpose, since I often discover the answers when I “keep on readin’.” Thanks for what you do
Hi,
I am a very infrequent commenter. You may find my feedback of use:
1. The brief comments after article links are very helpful. Anything noted as “Important” I always read. Consistently, I find those links to be, well, important. :-)
2. The eclectic nature of the links is critical for success. Please keep it up.
3. Yes, some of the articles are over my head. I find that to be good–I want to be challenged, not spoon fed.
4. Volume of daily links is about right. I usually browse 3-5 links daily. I realize this is sometimes a tough deadline to meet but it is appreciated.
5. I find the personal comments to readers helpful. Such as “few links up today as I was on a late flight.” These comments personalize the site, give context on why something is the way it is, and establish rapport with viewers.
I will endeavor to leave more comments. Occasional prompting us readers to be more active is always helpful and received with the spirit intended.
Lastly, your work here makes a difference.
Archimedes had that little insight that if he had a place to stand, a solid fulcrum and a lever long enough, he could move the whole world. Seems to me part of what is going on at NC it looking for fulcrums and levers and places to stand, in a shifting terrain of seediness and quicksand where the magicians of kleptocracy can wave their wands, and change the ground on a whim or to suit their current pleasure, free of consequences.
My broken-record offering is that the people who rule the rest of us, and bleed us of our lives and the wealth and comity we create in what seems purely analogous to a virulent malignant cancer, have a single, simple ethos they can, and very effectively do, use as lever, standpoint and fulcrum: grasping always for MORE.* It’s something they all can coalesce around, fits so well with human predilections for hierarchy, dominance and pleasure-seeking, and the pursuit of owning and controlling everything is measurable, quantifiable and pleasurable in itself. (And unlike tumors, the kleptocrats have figured out how to exit the dying bodies for new hosts and energy before the terminal moment — they “fear death,” but think they are on the point of beating that regulatory process too, http://investmentwatchblog.com/the-elite-have-a-great-fear-of-death-they-travel-with-multiple-bodyguards-they-install-safe-rooms-in-their-homes-they-buy-private-islands-on-the-other-side-of-the-world-and-they/?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral )
What the rest of us lack, I think, is an equally plain and comprehensible ethos that draws us together around “our common humanity,” if there is such a thing, and points in the direction of comity and a willingness to be satisfied with “enough,” and agreement on what “enough” is (weekly pedicures? Monthly? 1600 square feet on the upper East side? 3600 square feet in Westchester? An LG refrigerator box in the subway tunnels?)
My personal sense is that “there is enough to go all the way around the table,” to meet the Maslow basics for all nearly 8 billion of us in a way that stops killing the planet. Not sure that is a sentiment that’s shared, though lip service in that direction is out there. But compare this, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-01/the-meaninglessness-of-ending-extreme-poverty-, with this, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-21/how-the-world-bank-should-help-the-world-s-poorest-pay-them …Whoo-Hoo! 700 million new accounts in “financial services!”
Looks just from the comments here that ordinary people not “read into” the Scam and thus not benefiting from it, are feeling the rising tide of anger that in the past has led to Vanguard-hijacked revolutions and More of the Same. Not seeing too much indication that “distributive justice” is in people’s hearts, alongside the personal outrage that the Few have scammed the most of us and suborned the institutions we thought were there to protect OUR claims and property. And groping toward something reminiscent of the kinds of tactical and strategic formulations that characterize how the War Department defines how to attack (not, of course, to actually defeat) insurgency and terrorism, aimed at the financial sector in all its pseudopodic infiltrations. (Bear in mind that the “business community” is sort of in awe of the success of the “business model” of the current actual Terror State called ISIS/Daesh/the Caliphate, and the incredible seductive attraction of its message and persistence, http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2014-the-business-of-isis-spreadsheets-annual-reports-and-terror/#/ and http://www.startupdaily.net/2014/09/terrorist-group-isis-quite-lucrative-business-model/ and http://www.acfcs.org/the-expensive-business-of-terrorism-economist-loretta-napoleoni-tracks-down-isis-funds/, “terrorist groups are like any other organization…”
So what is “our” ethos, as contrasted to the the one that informs and motivates and powers up the Very Special Few? Does the question even merit the asking, am I just not getting it, that it’s self-evident? or is this all just a game-theory exercise of developing counter-moves, from a position of profound weakness and from way behind the power curve, with the hope of “reining in” and “regulating” impulses and activities that seem organic to how humans organize and behave, and leaving off any significant but distracting consideration of normative stuff?
And speaking of broken records, what energy is there anywhere in the ancient wisdom that seems to have understood a lot about the nature of money and debt and the horrible costs that the Gods Mammon and Molech collect to ensure “prosperity?” The ancients reportedly invented the Jubilee to zero out all the many kinds of “debts” and re-level the playing field, albeit always for another round of concentration and accumulation and slavery… Any takers for fighting the flood of MSM and educational-system and institutional propaganda, and other barriers, to call for a real Jubilee? Lots of moving parts, of course:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-28/debt-gdp-ratios-demand-debt-jubilee
http://www.npr.org/2014/12/11/370156273/iceland-experiments-with-a-jubilee-of-debt-forgiveness
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-07/bond-bubble-debt-jubilee
http://www.jubileeusa.org/home.html
* For more on MORE-ism, http://www.slideshare.net/Principalsbranding/future-of-brands , https://twitter.com/moreism, and http://www.streetarticles.com/happiness/do-you-suffer-from-moreism , and http://www.natsoc.org.au/resources/frank-fenner-foundation-newsletter/2009/nature-and-society-october-november-2009
Please keep the private equity and LBO articles coming. If I don’t understand something, I’ll ask about it in the comments. I need to understand this stuff better so I can refute al the bs I keep hearing.
I read this sight twice a day, every day. I think I’ve commented once (actually, asked a question of Yves, her answer for which was immensely useful for me, but didn’t due much to aid her workload…)
My biggest concern is that the site is overly dependent on two very over-worked individuals. I’m also concerned about the “so what” aspect of reading it. (Unless I use this information to actually DO something out in the wider world , what’s the point of reading it? I’d be better served to get home earlier and play with my kids.)
To help address both those concerns, I’d ask Yves and Lambert to help (or at least help start a discussion about how to) set up local communities of readers. “Meet-ups” are fantastic opportunities to help make this information and impact more real, but shouldn’t have to depend on Yves coming to town (and I’m sure she’s never going to come to my town). I would love to start interacting in person with fellow readers once a month or so. The activities and action such groups could spur are innumerable (e.g. A pub “write-up” where we all get our pints and sit at a few tables, taking 30 min to each write our letter to Nefarious Target XYZ, throw it in the mail bin and have a second pint).
I love the idea of being part of a “small group of thoughtful, committed citizens” and believe action, more than anything else, would help fight the cynicism and “outrage fatigue” that threaten all of us here.
Local meet-ups sound like a good idea! Readers would have to organise them themselves locally, but they should be linked somehow from NC.
When we sit in front of our computers reading NC on our own we are socially atomized and feel helpless. There are a few things one can do alone, like writing letters to congresscritters, but I think the advantages of meet-ups are clear: transcending one’s social atomization allows for more engagement, helps prevent fatigue, reaches out to people and might, far off in the future, eventually allow for collective action and mobilization, which I think is the only way social change has ever been effected. Always remember: “Power concedes nothing without a demand” (Frederick Douglass)
Anyone up for local meetups in Arizona? I’m in Tucson.
It occurs to me I owe NC special thanks, because I openly use the comments to promote the Green Party and you let me. I do think it’s relevant, and I try to contribute on various issues, as well. Trust me, I return the favor, sending links from here to a considerable network of activists (issue organizations, as well as the party) who can use the information. It’s an indispensable resource.
I’ll try to be more responsive when you get deep into the weeds, if only to ask questions. Ultimately, those technical posts are the real source of the site’s value. It’s nice to hear that comments matter, beyond Yves’, Lambert’s, and some authors’ gratifying responsiveness. Very flattering, really.
Thanks again for your work. I just hope you get some good out of the advice you’ve been showered with – I do know resource constraints.
I have been visiting NC every day for several months now, and I simply couldn’t get through a day without it. I am a bit wonkish about macroeconomics and the global monetary system. When I try to explain some basic principles of finance and economics to people who are not paying attention, in part because they just don’t get the connection between what is happening on the macro level and what is happening to them on a personal level, I get the old “deer in the headlights” look.
Maybe, collectively, we can come up with simpler memes that resonate with people who don’t really pay attention to what’s happening on a day to day basis. For those of you who are old enough to remember, think of the Reagan-era “welfare queen” as an example. (I can read about and talk about the OECD, EU, ISDS, TTIP, TTP, IMF, ZIRP, QE, etc. all day long, but I recognize that I am the exception not the rule.)
Thank you Yves and Lambert (and contributors) for the thought-provoking content. I feel like my wonky macroeconomic self has found a digital place to call home. Long live NC!
No hard feelings, as a proud defeatist (and former nihilist, until nihilism became defeatism.) The reason that the rhetorical guns of Navarone have failed to sink the bobbing caïque of cheery despair seems to be a fundamental difference of perspective. Everyone probably agrees that there’s more to civil society than electoral politics. Most would grant that as the state becomes increasingly degenerate the scope and importance of civil society expands at the expense of electoral ceremony. The interesting question in this case is, How far has the degeneracy progressed?
IMO it’s well beyond the terminal levels of the Warsaw Pact, different in detail but often analogous at a system-theoretic level of abstraction. Maybe you hadda be there. One of the reasons why Taibbi and Ames were ripshit was that they came home to find so much of what they left behind in Russia. Or look at Orlov.
Charting the disease in specific detail is important. But not because the government would fix it, if only Stalin knew. The state is not going to debulk to cure the galloping cancer while it amputates everything that’s festering inside. That would kill it quicker.
So, by analogy to the Warsaw Pact: What do you see more of as the state degenerates? Internationalism from above and below; organized and spontaneous mass subversion; elite treason. Promote these things, and one of these days somebody will go bink with one finger and holy shit, it’s knocked over. Who knew? Certainly not the Fabians like Gorbachev or the well-meaning apparatchik who will do it for the USA. This point of view is highly offensive to partisans like Digby or Pierce. They warn of chaos and apocalypse. From their insular American perspective they forget that states go off the rails all the time and world knows what to do. With no USA to fuck up the reconstruction, it will go more smoothly than they expect.
That, and not learned helplessness, is why this commenter is presently in a refractory period with regard to pulling the electoral pud.
Yves et al,
I must admit, its more a bandwidth issue than lack of awareness or readers not being “savvy” enough to understand what is going on, and what has been going on in the world of banking and finance for at least a generation – with banking and finance being but one are of the corporate plutocracy, one that can destroy lives, businesses and homes in rapid succession – which has certainly been the case for many readers.
How to influence key decision makers and public opinion formers is an up hill task, one I know only too well because I do it professionally. To say its thankless is an understatement, but we continue for the sake of others and our offspring.
Suffice to say, whilst my own work now consumes much of my time, I, like many others visit this site and often Tweet and highlight stories and coverage – but the facts remain that for most readers its difficult to engage and post, not because they have nothing to say, but because the stress and time needed to earn enough to make ends meet keeps growing longer and longer and both TTIP and TTP threaten to make matters worse for the bulk of us – its that simple, many are stressed, plain simple worn out and facing an uphill struggle each and every day.
So much for the American dream and supposed workers of capitalism!
I have been reading NC for many years and most of the time I do not feel qualified to comment on NC posts because I do not understand all the intricacies at play with many of those posts. I do try to read NC each day and I can say that I learn something each time I visit and have a much better understanding of just how mucked up our financial system really is.
Thank you NC and please keep throwing those jabs.
I would just like to remind NC that when you do a post regarding legislation, it is helpful to provide not only the actual title of the bill, but the Congressional index no., e.g. H.R. 1599, so we can be sure what we are talking about when contacting our delegations.
Also, FWIW, I like to fax my rep. and senators. I think this contact method offers the impact of a phone call plus the convenience of an email, while at the same time it is easy to attach a PDF of the scintillating NC post of the moment for back up of your POV. I use an online fax service for a few bucks a month, and I have several Congressional committees and my delegation programmed in as groups, so I can slam them all at once.
And may I add I take some personal pride that the White House BLOCKED MY FAX NUMBER ON THEIR INCOMING. Is there a feather emoticon, not to be confused with Dan Quayle?
Thanks to this site, ECONNED and unusual personal circumstances, my life has been forever changed – and for that you have my deepest thanks. Prior to 2012, I was what you all refer to as a “sheeple”, despite advanced degrees and age. I simply didn’t have exposure to any other point of view – one doesn’t go looking for things when personal circumstances do not appear to be amiss.
When events of 2012 turned my world view on its head, I went looking and found NC. Since then, this site has taught me what I perceived but ignored; that the American system is deeply flawed and largely run by those working overtime to keep the public in the dark. I suspect I am not alone in owing much of my awakening to the high quality articles and to your passion for change.
It is exactly because of changes like yours that I deprecate the term “sheeple”!!!!!
A sheep is a sheep forevermore; not so, for example, you.
Yves,
I try to read this site daily, though working full-time, kids, husband, dog, ferret, rabbit, life, make my reading time very limited. This site has done more to inform me of what is really going on than any other news medium around. I also share on Facebook, and discuss the information I read on this site with husband, kids, extended family, friends, or anybody else I run into that I start to talk about these issues with. I have gotten quite a few people tired of me and my posting on FB, but I have also informed others, who now understand more about the economy and the corruption of our political and banking system. My sister and brother-in-law, who also lost their homes have been empowered by my discussions with them, so that they now understand they were not the bad guys in the loss of their home. That is very meaningful. And it is a direct result of your work.
I often wondered if I was getting through to people, but I see now I am. This is the one site that has made a difference to me in understanding what is going on.
One other thing, sometimes I start to develop my own ideas about what is going on, like I started thing a while back, about the concept of economic rent, and how the wealthy have basically set up a rent extraction racket with our entire economy. Then, not long after, you had an article about rentiers. It was so helpful to me in developing my thinking about this.
These people who have stolen our way of life have had many years to plan, develop and execute their ideas. We are way behind, but at least are now onto them. It is the ideas that are being brought to light and developed by sites like this that provide the foundation for creating a better society. They are getting out there.
Thanks. You done good.
Quick comment from me on this. I have not been able to post for a while due to lack of time – it’s all I can do simply to keep up with reading these days, and 90% of the time it’s on a mobile device (to which end your mobile redesign has been a great help – the site has gone from borderline unusable to fairly decent). I also have technical issues with posting comments from mobile, which may be partly your site but I suspect is mostly a problem on my end (it’s not exactly a high end device).
When I do read I always try to prioritize the financial topics and educate myself on the issue at hand, although I don’t always take the time to post a comment afterward. I hadn’t realized quite how much you rely on them for validation and credibility so I will try to do so from now on, even if it’s just a quick “good work” or similar.
I confess the private equity series hasn’t grabbed me to quite the same extent as the GFC series (where the importance was clear to everyone) or the mortgage title series, which was pretty clearly documenting a massive coordinated fraud on the American public that impacted disproportionately on the poor and middle class. Possibly private equity amounts to the same thing, but it hasn’t been as clear to me as it was in the earlier cases – not sure if that’s down to the way the message has been delivered or because it’s just better hidden this time. That said, if you tell me that there’s something there and it’s worth my time then I will make a serious effort to follow along, even if I can’t follow the argument and anticipate the conclusions to quite the extent I could in the earlier cases.
I have been reading this site since 2007 and I owe a lot to it. Probably the two most important things I have learned are how to parse media articles for bias and filter out the underlying power mechanics, and how to let go of the neoliberal “utility maximization as a model for all things in life” philosophy that I didn’t even realize I had. In hindsight I am appalled at the extent to which that last one shaped my thinking for a long time, and it’s made me realize the extent to which we all rely on the appeal to authority fallacy rather than actually taking the time to do our homework – even those of us who consider ourselves rational and scientific. If I was to boil down my lessons from NC to one sentence, it would be: Take nothing at face value, and always check the evidence.
Hopefully I will be able to participate more regularly again in future. Keep up the good work.
Although late to the party, I’ll throw in my two-cents as well. I’m another long term reader, with very few posts. I came here sometime during the early stages of the financial crisis (brought here by a posting on a lib/prog political site which I no longer visit); the topic, if I remember correctly, was credit default swaps, or some such thing which was meaningless gibberish to me at the time. I have no background in finance, and only some ancient, shallow exposure to economics. After my first visit here I was hooked. Although there was much I did not understand, it was my first exposure to someone actually, and honestly, trying to explain what was going on in the *real* economy.
As things would have it, about the time I started frequenting NC I found myself a casualty of the Great Recession. After a chain of almost unbroken back luck, I ended up in foreclosure and bankruptcy. Although I have long been a non-believer in “the system”, the chaos and disruption of that period made me want to understand how and why it all happened. Obviously, the MSM had no answers or insight. I found myself trying to wrap my brain around financial concepts that were utterly alien to me, and which up to that point had held no interest. NC was the only place that I found real analysis and informed *questioning* of “the system”.
Like many others, apparently, this has become my major daily portal for news, thought, discussion. Since I have a philosophical bent, I especially enjoy the postings by Philip Pilkington, Philip Mirowski, Michael Hudson, et. al., who delve into the convoluted ideology that underlies modern economic theory. Thanks for everything you do.
Another voice here from the peanut gallery. I have only recently come to be a regular reader, but as for many others NC is now my go-to site for news and information. I feel like I’m a bit lost until I have perused the daily links and water cooler posts. When I have a bit more time I try to consume a meaty post or three.
My background is most decidedly not in the fields of economics or finance. My interests revolve primarily around issues of the environment and ecology. But a couple of years ago, I realized that I could not hope to understand any current events without an understanding of finance, as that’s how the world is wired these days. So slowly, painfully, I am educating myself about finance and economic theory. It takes an enormous amount of my fading middle aged brainpower to read the wonky posts, but I plow on even if I only understand a fraction of the info. In this way I have successfully taught myself many things so I persist, and learn a little bit more with each post!
I have commented once or twice on issues that I feel I can contribute to in a semi-rational manner, but otherwise I keep silent in the presence of folks who know much more than I can ever hope to grasp. Please do not take my silence for apathy! I am intensely interested in the subjects you pursue, and am deeply grateful for your time and energy. (I’ve been meaning to tip and send a picture or two of plants [or fungi], so it’s on me to stop procrastinating and do so.)
With deepest gratitude,
Adrienne
P.S. The commentary here is exceptional. One thing that slows me down in keeping up with articles is the need to read the entire comments section. I rarely find internet comments to be even bearable to read, let alone worthwhile: but NC’s comments section is the best on the Intertubes, IMHO. I know that keeping the comment quality high requires ruthless moderation, and I for one appreciate that. Life is too short, and our predicaments too serious, to coddle or suffer fools. Peace out!