If the promise of better times looks “real”, then the hungry man might not take up arms against his/her government. One of the ways to make that promise look “real”, is to either actually create jobs,or create the illusion that there are jobs out there. MLMs are extremely good at creating the illusion of jobs out there.
IOW, MLMs make very good “safety valves”.
I think we are in for a wave of new MLMs, with very funny money from extremely unusual financial sources financing them.
basically, our tax money/future earnings are being funneled without much debate or process into any institution that can scare our
a) The problem is that by not allowing the financial institutions — especially Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae — to fail, the US Congress has put a gun to its head, that forces it to support _every_ financial institution that _might_ fail;
b) If CitiGroup and/or CitiBank fail, then the economy of roughly fifty countries instantly fail, with them filing bankruptcy, just like Iceland did, and Swizerland and Ireland are about to do.
Roughly six first world countries can have an economic failure, before the entire world is plunged into war. Roughly twenty second world countries have to fail, for a world war to ensue. Roughly forty third world countries have to fail, for a world war to ensure. Given the combination of countries that will have an “instant” economic failure, if Citigroup or Citibank fail, the best _militarily_ defensive option, is to keep Citigroup and Citibank afloat.
It isn’t an issue of who can come up with the scariest, theoretical scenario. It is a matter of who can deal with the practical consequences of the privately owned financial institution that, for all practical purposes, has run the economy of a between quarter and an eighth of the countries on the planet.