Seeing is Believing - Is that What it Takes to Not Repeat Past Economic & Political Mistakes?

Last night Why You Care went to the movies. But, not just any movie it was Screen on the Green on the Mall. Which means a large movie screen gets built on the Mall with the Capitol dome perfectly framed behind it. Normally this wouldn't amount to a Why You Care posting but it does. Stick with us because it matters. What was the movie? Well, none other than 1972 Robert Redford political drama The Candidate. Which to jog your memory is about an erstwhile liberal activist who runs a Don Quixote like Senate campaign against the Republican incumbent in California for the purpose of being able to talk about his issues. Sound familiar? But, of course, along the way he begins to gain in the polls, not by sticking to his issues but by using platitudes (his slogan: A Better Way) in order to broaden his message. Kinda interested in where we are going now?

Here's why you care: Against Congress' brilliant bone white dome backdrop, Redford's candidate played out on the movie screams to gasps, guffaws and occasional laughter - but not for the intended reasons. The reason was that the largely 20-something and early 30-something crowd had never seen the 1972 film before. What was old was now new - and the issues in the 1972 campaign sound like our past months of political and economic coverage.

With no irony lost on the crowd here's a sampling of what drew gasps and wows:

* The Republican incumbent candidate talked at length about the environment and cleaning up the smog in California.

* The Republican incumbent candidate talked about need for tighter regulation when it came to offshore oil drilling. (Fortune's got a great article relating to that today).

* Redford's candidate talked about the economy and California's unemployment rate being incredibly high.

* Redford's candidate talked about how addressing issues of guns, crime, etc ignored the underlying issues of race and how we make society work. (Sort of like how the Wall Street Journal wrote about changing city demographics due to real estate in the past few days).

That's to name a few.

Here's why you care again: The crowd was stunned because they read about past bubble's bursting and economies slumping, but they haven't lived through very many. The question for you is do you want to be on the cycle of ridding a bubble, losing money, latching on to another bubble? Or do you want to be a part of a cycle of saving, investing long term in well analyzed remnants of the last burst bubble that will grow for the future? In other words, why you care is because if you are willing to each day take a look at a few prescient business articles then you can be ahead of the curve. Often times that means ignoring the sexy headline and paying attention to something buried in the paper. It is tough, but Why You Care is happy to highlight the reporters ahead of the curve. Even if you are in your 20's, early 30's there's enough coverage out there and analysis that everything old doesn't have to be new again.

And today's example of why you care: There's a new report out (which got a great write in the New York Times) showing that women are now just like men. That is to say, the slacking economy is bouncing them out of employment at the same rate as men. The worst part is that for these women (like the men) it is happening at the height of their financially productive years (25-54). Seems to us that means they'll have less saving moving forward - which means less to invest for their retirement, and most definitely means they can't take advantage of deals to be had when a bubble bursts.