Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,272
- 1,283
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
what is wrong with the information at this link?
go pick nits with a liberal
Yeah I don't think anyone really even bothers to read any articles by Ron Paul or from the Mises institute around here. You'd think at least a few conservatives would be interested in free market economics around here.
That's the magic of Capitalism in a country where the laws are observed. That's one reason why the United States is so wealthy. Of course, bigger government intrusions are killing America, so expect even the middle class to be destroyed. Pretty soon we'll all be sharing the misery.
Why? It's a totally discredited philosophy. It failed.
When Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman, appeared before a congressional committee last week, he admitted that during his two decades of Fed stewardship he was an ideologue with, in retrospect, a misplaced faith in the ability of financial markets to self-regulate.
During both Bush administrations, and Bill Clinton's presidency as well, Greenspan was considered an economic oracle, a man who could foresee crises and take steps to avoid them, so this was some admission.
The Greenspan mea culpa confirmed the dominance of neo-liberalism - embraced by conservatives, centrist US Democrats and by social democrats in Europe and in Australia - was over. The god of small government and unregulated markets is dead.
How does something that never existed in the first place, fail?
Most of the liberals around here even admit there isn't a true free market. You wouldn't have one until you had currency freedom. You can't have a free market, where a monopoly on one currency exists, and a central bank controls money and credit through interest rate manipulation. It's impossible. The market moves based on the Fed's actions. That isn't a free market. There are ELEMENTS within the market that have an overall sense of freedom within them, but ultimately the market as a whole is nothing close to "free".
The free market failed. It went haywire. It killed itself through greed. Once the theory became practice its flaws were apparent.
Well, I argue that greed doesn't need to be regulated. I argue that consumers should be educated enough about money, that they shouldn't need the government to make their decisions for them.
You don't, and that's where we differ. Smarter consumerism could have avoided the US housing crisis.
Let me ask you something, would you have been stupid enough to sign an adjustable rate mortgage?
There are reasons the US is so wealthy. Natural resources for one. You can't really do all that well without them and the US has them in abundance. Another reason is population. 300 m people are going to produce some really whiz-bang individuals and so there have been.
The reason for the economic crisis and the recession is that capitalism was allowed to run completely unchecked. Bad idea.
Sure, people that can't afford loans shouldn't apply for them. But I'm not sure what you're advocating here, making laws against stupid people? Seems to me it would be more fair, and more constitutionally sound, to make laws against selling loans the same day you made them.They would have been fine if they hadn't lent the money to people who couldn't afford it, and who SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.
Both are to blame. But You don't get to blame deregulation while completely avoiding the manipulation of credit by the Fed.
There's no reason a bank should be setting our rates as they see fit, and offering virtually-free overnight credit to supposedly "jumpstart an economy". All they do is jumpstart another bubble with their newly created liquidity that ultimately looks for a home somewhere in the market. It's too much money to be putting into the system, and it causes asset bubbles. It's a damn endless cycle, we watch it happen every 5 or so years now. But somehow, like idiots, we continue to let them do it because you know why? We're too fucking lazy and stupid to care enough to research it for ourselves. We care only enough to allow them to do what they tell us is best for us, because then we can go on living our lives without the headache.
It's much more fun to make it partisan, and blame it on a wedge issue that we can fight about every election, or every catastrophe for that matter.
Have you taken the time to research Austrian economics, Rav?
The Moral Hazard of Regulation
Since the bailout bill passed, I have been frequently disturbed to hear experts wrongly blaming the free market for our recent economic problems and calling for more regulation. In fact, further regulation can only make things worse.
It is important to understand that regulators are not omniscient. It is not feasible for them to anticipate every possible thing that could go wrong with whatever industry or activity they are regulating. They are making their best guesses when formulating rules. It is often difficult for those being regulated to understand the many complex rules they are expected to follow. Very wealthy corporations hire attorneys who may discover a myriad of loopholes to exploit and render the spirit of the regulations null and void. For this reason, heavy regulation favors big business against those small businesses who cannot afford high-priced attorneys.
The other problem is the trust that people blindly put in regulations, and the moral hazard this creates. Too many people trust government regulators so completely that they abdicate their own common sense to these government bureaucrats. They trust that if something violates no law, it must be safe. How many scams have Its perfectly legal as a hypnotic selling point, luring in the gullible? Many people did not understand the financial house of cards that are derivatives, but since they were legal and promised a great return, people invested. It is much the same in any area rife with government involvement. Many feel that just because their children are getting good grades at a government school, they are getting a good education. After all, they are passing the government-mandated litmus test. But, this does not guarantee educational excellence. Neither is it always the case that a child who does NOT achieve good marks in school is going to be unsuccessful in life. Is your drinking water safe, just because the government says it is? Is the internet going to magically become safer for your children if the government approves regulations on it? I would caution any parent against believing this would be the case. Nothing should take the place of your own common sense and due diligence.
continued: Congressman Ron Paul - The Moral Hazard of Regulation - Texas Straight Talk
Then Russia and the former Soviet Union would also be extremely wealthy. That didn't happen because they rejected capitalism.
Uh, no. Capitalism was curtailed by government intervention. This is a common misconception. You should look up Crony Capitalism. Yet another reason to get government out of business except for matters of law.
Bush did a shit load of deregulation.
what is with your brain?