Culprits all around

This latest post-mania dump is very interesting. The WSJ has a whole section devoted to the subject, including discussions about the bailout. So, let's name a few of the culprits who caused the problem that we, the taxpayers, are going to have to pay to resolve.

- Government, believe it or not. Several initiatives oriented toward extending home-ownership to the less well-to-do are related to the mess. Freddie and Fannie went haywire, to boot, using the goodwill extended by their special status. Even, old Sallie was troublesome (pity the poor students; pox to those who lined their pockets). The main issue here is that the pseudo-capitalists running those quasi-shows really lined their pockets (without an payback being deemed necessary).
- Gamers, namely those who helped build and use the 'gambling' palaces of Wall Street and Chicago. One technique took things that were worse than junk (think, sub-prime) and layered on them some glorious thought related to value. As if the AAA rating comes out of nothing.
- Regulators, not doing their job, as they were given to believe that it was no longer necessary or that they could not make judgments (thanks to Alan and Ben, et al). Oh yes, says Alan, we clean up the poop afterward. Ah, like a baby's diaper?
- The less than well-off who bought the dream of the house that always increases in value. Of course, that such increases lined a few pockets does indicate that some type of appreciation can happen; that 'capital' theory looks elsewhere is the story to tell.
- Those smart cats who thought that mathematics and computing would tie up the world's messiness, especially those from engineering and science who may have gone to help make that whole gaming ontology more unstable.
- CEOs and others who think that the world is their big oyster to eat by divine right, usually to the detriment of the doers.
- Workers who laze on the job and don't work (this added to be fair to all sides).
- Investors who look for the quick buck (albeit, some of the super rich did just that - the near-zero aspect of the game would point to any outsized reward as not moral or ethical, and perhaps, not legal.
- ...

This can be a long list. What will be the next mania? Is is already started?

There is a better way.

Remarks:

09/19/2013 -- To some, evidently, grabbing oodles of money, without due consideration of ramifications to others or to the common weal, is the smartest thing; but, we do know that virtue is smart, to boot. Even the secularists are trying hard to show how their worldview can lead to right living (as in, they do not need God to have a conscience). And, what virtue might be prime important to this discussion? Prudence (see Remarks, this day).

05/09/2011 -- Doers, reconsidered.

10/11/2009 -- Discussion has gone over to FED-aerated. Note the 10/11/2009 Remarks about the Business Week article on India's progress' inhibitors. 'Near zero' recognizes that some always suffer more than others, especially in win-win situations, as the whole notion of characterization minimizes visceral reactions by diminishing the real in favor of the abstracted (ah, the modern world, you say?).

12/17/2008 -- USA Today had their list of culprits.

10/29/2008 -- Things to look at further will be financial engineering, gaming, and leverage, plus how we get fairy dusting involved.

Modified: 09/19/2013