What will this month be called?
Sep. 22nd, 2008 03:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
A light question about a serious topic: when the historians write about the roller-coaster ride we're in the middle of, what will they call it?
I mean, every important historical event gets a catchy name, from "Watergate" to "9/11" to "Black Monday". It's clear to me that this September is one that they'll be talking about for decades to come, which means that they *will* settle on a common name for it eventually. How long it takes for such a name to arise ranges from days to years, but there's no time like the present.
So here's your chance to influence the history books. What would *you* call this mess?
Fine print: Winner will be selected by consensus of historians in 20 years. It is not guaranteed that any entrant will win. Chances of winning are directly proportional to relevance and pithiness of name, but it is entirely possible that these will not matter. Bad puns do not guarantee victory. Keep your hands inside the ride at all times.
I mean, every important historical event gets a catchy name, from "Watergate" to "9/11" to "Black Monday". It's clear to me that this September is one that they'll be talking about for decades to come, which means that they *will* settle on a common name for it eventually. How long it takes for such a name to arise ranges from days to years, but there's no time like the present.
So here's your chance to influence the history books. What would *you* call this mess?
Fine print: Winner will be selected by consensus of historians in 20 years. It is not guaranteed that any entrant will win. Chances of winning are directly proportional to relevance and pithiness of name, but it is entirely possible that these will not matter. Bad puns do not guarantee victory. Keep your hands inside the ride at all times.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 02:14 am (UTC)More importantly, you underestimate the scope of the problem. If there's a *true* financial meltdown, government guarantees are irrelevant: they won't be able to cover it. Even the government's resources are limited -- as a number of people are pointing out today, the proposed bailout is going to stretch them horribly, and essentially cripple the government for at least several years.
If things really melted down, so would the government. In all likelihood, those guarantees would go out the window in the face of a general default, the US dollar would crash, we'd hit hyperinflation, and essentially all personal financial assets would be wiped out. (*Except*, note, possibly those of the super-rich, who are mostly smart enough to diversify their holdings overseas. Although it's likely the the entire world economy would be flattened, so it's not clear that there would be any safe havens from the earthquake.)
People treat the US government as if it's impossible for it to default. But the reality is that governments *do* default, and it's pretty horrible when they do so...
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 04:17 am (UTC)