The political, social networking site that integrates politics with popular culture.

Avatar of Chase Knudsen
Chase Knudsen @chaseknuts 7 years, 1 month ago

I do agree to an extent that we do need regulation but not as much as we have now. I mean even in Bush’s Presidency there was thousands of new regulations brought forth and so far the same with OBama.

I understand the need for some regulation to keep checks and balances and to help with the morality of the people. But when government gets too involved it turns bad in which it did. Granted the banks gave loans out like crazy and the market fail, but the idea of the Government bailing theses banks out (which they did) is morally wrong in my eyes. But overall I understand and agree with you to an extent.

Avatar of Gary
Gary @grand-vizier 7 years, 1 month ago

First there is merit about the big businesses overwhelming everything during the “guilded age”
During the more recent times there is an equal if not more pronounced takeover by the public and to a lesser extent private unions.The unions fund the politicians who then reward them with perks and high salaries.
When ever a candadate gives a speech in front of a public union it is a direct conflict of interest and should be illegal.
Elected representatives are supposed to represent the voters,not a special interst group.
In companies there is “labor” and management.Elected representative are definitly supposed to be “management”.
The two are each supposed to negociate for the best deal fot its interests,
When a politician sats to a union “I will fight for you”he/she has abdicated their responsibility and is just pandering for votes/money from the unions.
If a candadate were to make a similar promise the a corporation they would be decried form the treetops!
As to the failure of the housing market,it as was the real estate crash of the late 1980′s a DIRECT result of goverment action.
First the banks were forced to make sub-prime loans by congress,that as you say were doomed from inception. If they refused the various regulators caused them to be dis-advantaged against their competitors.
Second fannie and freddie (under government orders) created a booming market for the packaged loans.(see Third)
Third the rating agencies caused these sub-prime mortgage bounds to be rated AAA.
Since banks by law had to hold reserves in AAA bonds they and other similarly regulated financial institutions were forced to keep buys them long after smart investors knew they were going to fail.
In addition since there seemed to be an endless supply of buyers for new homes (after all they just go up in value)the building industry just kept building far more homes that could be absorbed by the market.
ALL of this was caused by the government intrusion into athe marketplace where absolutely no politician had the slightest idea what they were doing!
I could write BOOKS about the fumbling ,ignorant acts by government trying to “help” the economy.
In truth Adam Smith’s “invisable hand”while not perfect is thousands of times better than those classic words of Ronald Reagan, the the scariest thing you may ever hear is “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you”‘.


You must be logged in to reply to this topic.