Don't blame Wall Street
About your “Root of the problem” editorial in the Nov. 9 edition: I guess I don't quite get the point, or maybe I kinda do. Are you just trying reinvigorate the old topic of campaign reform, or are you a lobbyist for the Tom Udall legislation that is attempting to address the issue? If you're trying to reinvigorate the topic, you gotta major up the dose of inciting rhetoric.
Here's the thing: Legislation to regulate the political electoral process is futile. To then go on and say that the Occupy Wall Street movement was born due to the lack of regulation of political campaigning just doesn't make any sense to me. And then to go on to demonize Wall Street as the culprit for our woes? Wall Street isn't a devilish place—it's just a manifestation of human greed, which we all possess plenty of. Michael Moore declaring himself to be part of the 1 percent that Occupy is protesting symbolizes the complexity of the issue. Prior to his declaration, he may have been a candidate to be a poster child of the movement.
Most of the reason we're in a pickle right now, a gigantic-dildo-size pickle, is due to the collapse of the housing market. I'm not a fan of financing one or two wars, but although our financing of these wars may be a moral collapse, they're not the primary reason we're all suffering from economic collapse. The housing collapse is due to several factors, least of all Wall Street. Wall Street didn't go out and hold a gun to our heads when we signed 30 pages of notarized loan documents and promissory notes to buy houses we couldn't afford, or could afford but refused to pay for once they became worth less than we wanted them to be. We signed all those documents and made all those promises because we thought that the housing bubble would never burst and we'd all make ourselves rich—we'd all become part of the 1 percent that Occupy is vilifying.
Allowing us to sign those loan documents that we promised to repay, allowing banks to fund those loans, and allowing Wall Street to bundle those loans as viable investments to sell to other people— that's where regulation and government failed us. Our government and its regulatory agencies were asleep at the wheel while we buried the capital markets with our own greed and ambition to get rich. Hoping that Udall or someone else can legislate campaign reform so that corporations and Wall Street won't be the big bad wolves just ain't gonna happen. Legislating away boom and bust economies through campaign reform is like altering the human genome to create the perfect human. Good luck with the monster that might—make that, will—create.
Jay Thompson, Downtown
Middle America strikes back
About your Nov. 23 editorial, “John Lynch said what?”: If you haven't already noticed, there are quite a few hard-working “small Midwest town” residents of San Diego. Many of them like to work for a living, rather than complain about the status quo of local government and other left-leaning entitlement-baby issues. All Doug Manchester and Lynch did was go out, work and think a little smarter and make a few bucks.
I think we've spent far too much time in this city worrying about neighborhood, labor, environmental and special interests at the expense of those “small Midwest town” residents who've made this city grow. Your “left-moving population” is simply a figment of your tilted thinking, unless you're referring to those clowns up in Sacramento.
Welcome to the real world, CityBeat. John Lynch is going to say quite a bit more than “what.”
John Shean, Stonecrest