Keskustelujen arkisto

Greetings!

For Lars: "political correctness" in my last posting means that certain
policies put in under the Clinton administration, and later supported by
the Democrats and then Republicans in the last decade, forced American
banks to loan money in areas where they should not have, i.e. the
so-called "sub-prime" mortgages.

I mentioned the "bubble mentality" created thereby in the real estate
market, and a bubble is always the same as irrational greed. Uncle
Scrooge would never have gotten involved in such things!

So you are right! Greed and interfering government policies catalyzed
the chaos right now. But stay optimistic: About 3% to 5% of the market
has adversely affected the entire market: but in the end, if the
government(s) do not take too many incorrect actions, things will settle
down. 95% - 97% of Americans pay their mortgages on time and are
employed. This is not even close to a depression with e.g. 30%
unemployment.

And you can do worse than follow Scrooge McDuck's example! Buy stocks
when they are low, sell when they are high, avoid bubble mentalities, and
stay cool in a panic!

Best Wishes!

L. Schulte

L. Schulte had written:

Scrooge would never have gone bankrupt by investing in subprime
mortgages,
> which were mainly about political correctness in getting mortgages to
> people without the means to support a house or pay a mortgage, and then
> "bundling them" to be sold to investors higher up the food chain in an
> irrational bubble market.

Lars replied:
Let me get this straight: the current financial and economic crises which
are causing lots of firings, factory closures, loss of pensions,
bankruptcies etc. etc. all over the globe are *not* primarily caused by
irresponsible greed in the financial sector in combination with
international political instability and failed economic policies... but
rather by "political correctness"?!?! (Whatever "political correctness"
is.)

--
Be Yourself @ mail.com!
Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
Get a Free Account at www.mail.com

You may want to post this link from the very conservative Orange County Register (where Disneyland is) that many claims about the cause of the subprime crisis are false.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/loans-subprime-banks-2228728-law-lenders

On 4.12.2008, at 15:21, Leo Schulte wrote:
> "Just eight" was enough to feed the bubble mentality: the Community
> Reinvestment Act was the catalyst, and it does not really matter
> that a majority of banks were not directly subject to it. Besides
> the pressure from the bubble mentality, there was always a certain
> amount of de facto political pressure for banks to enter this market.
>
> And so we ask: What Would Uncle Scrooge Do? Like I said: Avoid both
> bubble and panic mentalities, buy stocks when they are low, sell at
> highs, and reinvest the profits. Scrooge is obviously not afraid of
> risk! America is all about taking risks, failing now and then, but
> always continuing to aspire! This is why Scrooge McDuck as a
> character developed by Barks has always fascinated me.
>
> Best Wishes!

Might I make a suggestion?

Cut the politics. It's a touchy subject, and self-righteous idiots of
all stripes are impossible to convince anyway.

With greetings,
Herbert Snorrason

Herbert:

> Might I make a suggestion?
>
> Cut the politics. It's a touchy subject, and self-righteous idiots
> of all stripes are impossible to convince anyway.

Self-righteous idiots do not, as much as they themselves may believe,
own politics, nor should we allow their delusional viewpoints to
constrict what we discuss here. The author of that piece in the
Weekly Standard used Scrooge McDuck to make a political point that,
by said use, makes the point fair game here. And yes, politics can be
a very touch subject, but that hardly excludes it from being
appropriate.

Gary

Economics never has and never can exist outside politics. Essential
aspects of the current financial mess lie in political decisions made
and enacted decades ago. Politics are all over the very bailouts
Scrooge satirically seeks to get a piece of, and which are currently
being rendered into high political theater by the efforts of the
chiefs of the American automakers as they try to get their piece of
the govermental largesse.

On Dec 5, 2008, at 5:06 PM, dux at ca.rr.com wrote:

> I don't believe this subject is "political" per se. I see it as a
> subject of "economics," or more precisely, "business." In my
> opinion the current economic "crisis" has little to do with
> politics and politicians but rather much to do with ordinary
> consumers with extraordinary hopes and expectations and
> overachieving businessmen wearing the profit-margin blinders. The
> free market has its rewards, and its pitfalls. The free market is
> engineered by humans, who as is commonly known are flawed at best.
>
> ---- Gary Leach <bangfish at cableone.net> wrote:
>> Herbert:
>>
>>> Might I make a suggestion?
>>>
>>> Cut the politics. It's a touchy subject, and self-righteous idiots
>>> of all stripes are impossible to convince anyway.
>>
>> Self-righteous idiots do not, as much as they themselves may believe,
>> own politics, nor should we allow their delusional viewpoints to
>> constrict what we discuss here. The author of that piece in the
>> Weekly Standard used Scrooge McDuck to make a political point that,
>> by said use, makes the point fair game here. And yes, politics can be
>> a very touch subject, but that hardly excludes it from being
>> appropriate.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>
>

On Nov. 30 Leo Schulte asserted that if more Americans and Europeans read
Scrooge comics, our economies would be in better shape. Certainly my early
education in macroeconomics came mostly from Scrooge/Barks comics; I had no
course in economics until college.
Consider WDC144: Scrooge hires Donald to spend several cubic meters of
cash that won't fit in the money bin. They travel the country spending the
cash, much of it on luxury items. We learned that this stimulates the
economy resulting in increased income for businesses---in particular,
Scrooge's businesses, and he has several more large sacks of money waiting
for him at the end of the story.
Now recall that Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke claimed that if all
else failed, the Federal Reserve could stimulate the economy out of a
recession by printing money and dropping it from helicopters. Some of his
critics have given him the nickname "Helicopter Ben". Perhaps relevant
today, something similar in the extreme happened in WDC126, when a tornado
scattered Scrooge's 3 cubic acres of cash all over the countryside. This
time there's too much stimulus: lots of people pick up millions each, and
perceiving themselves wealthy they quit their jobs. Thus the economy comes
to a sudden halt, and there's not much that the money can buy.
In fact, in this very story Scrooge states (page 3 panel 4) "I know that
money isn't worth anything!" That's quite a statement from a character
who's spent his life relentlessly acquiring more and more of it. But I
recall that about 2 months ago the Pope said something very similar about
money.
Other Scrooge stories have lessons about the law of diminishing returns,
and the correlation or lack of correlation of wealth and happiness. And we
who buy comic books have certainly learned about inflation. They cost a
lot more than the 10 cents price that used to be on the front cover.
Best wishes,
Larry Giver.

Hello,
I just came across Alberto Becattini's "Alberto's Page" and found my husband listed there. All his credits on the various cartoon series , etc, are under Les Kaluza; however, "Les" is NOT short for Lester (as stated on Alberto's Page" ) but Leszek.
Also, you might want to add my name: Kaluza Erna as I have worked in the animation field as well.
Thank you very much,
Erna

I was wondering: what family relations are mentioned in Taliaferro's Donald Duck
stories? I can think of two:

- In the Silly Symphones Sunday strip from 1937-10-17, Donald receives a message
from his cousin Della, telling that his nephews Louie, Huey and Dewey will have
to stay at Donald's place while the nephews' father is in hospital.

- In the Donald Duck Sunday strip from 1960-05-08, Scrooge finds a treasure
chest buried in the garden to his mansion, and the chest was buried by Scrooge's
father.

Both of these strips contradict with Don Rosa:
- According to Don Rosa, Della is Donald's sister (and not his cousin).
Additionally, Don Rosa thinks that HDL are Della's sons, but usually your
cousin's sons wouldn't at the same time be your nephews. The Taliaferro strip
tells us that HDL are Della's sons if, and only if, she has married her own
cousin (and that cousin would then also be Donald's brother).

- According to Don Rosa, Scrooge's father lived in Scotland until his death, but
the mansion in the Taliaferro strip doesn't look like Scrooge's father's home in
any of the Rosa stories, and doesn't seem to be located in Scotland either.
Additionally, Taliaferro tells us that Scrooge's father had a lot of money
(enough to fill up a treasure chest that he could bury), whereas Rosa tells us
that he was constantly broke.

But do the Taliaferro strips contradict with any stories made by anyone else,
apart from Don Rosa?

- In the movie "Donald's Nephews", Donald receives a letter from his sister
Dumbella. Dumbella doesn't have to be the same person as Della, so there is no
contradiction as far as I can see. They *could* be the same person, but that
would require another unusual family relation, with Della's father being the
brother of Della's sister.

- In the story "The Old Castle's Secret" we learn that the McDuck family used to
live in a castle in Scotland. But it doesn't tell when they moved away from the
castle -- they might have moved from that castle several centuries ago. So
there's no contradiction with that story. Is there any other Barks story
mentioning Scotland? Note that even if it says that Scrooge's father was living
in Scotland at some point, it doesn't automatically mean that he was living
there *for his whole life* -- he might have moved at a later point. Is there any
non-Rosa story (apart from the Taliaferro strip) telling whether he was rich or
poor?

Stefan