Bachmann's in

#76
#76
milohimself said:
My problem with the R candidates is, they've shown no indication of where they think regulation becomes necessary. The only conclusion I can draw from that until I hear otherwise, is that the objectivism train is still rolling strong, in spite of one of its biggest conductors (Greenspan) jumping off. I don't get it.

I'm against government being a player in nearly all markets, but there has to come a point where laws keeping business of any variety in check in some way has to come into play. Effing volumes can be written about why that is an absolute necessity, yet all I hear is the same "all regulation and all taxes bad!" chorus. Makes me want to bash my head against a wall.
Click to expand...

So you blame the markets but make no mention of Dodd or daffy duck? Odd to leave out the two major players who handed the knives to the banks and helped turn the American population around to face the other way.
 
#77
#77
milohimself said:
My problem with the R candidates is, they've shown no indication of where they think regulation becomes necessary. The only conclusion I can draw from that until I hear otherwise, is that the objectivism train is still rolling strong, in spite of one of its biggest conductors (Greenspan) jumping off. I don't get it.

I'm against government being a player in nearly all markets, but there has to come a point where laws keeping business of any variety in check in some way has to come into play. Effing volumes can be written about why that is an absolute necessity, yet all I hear is the same "all regulation and all taxes bad!" chorus. Makes me want to bash my head against a wall.
Click to expand...
They're competing in a Republican primary and talking to the base. What the heck do you expect from them?
 
#78
#78
milohimself said:
My problem with the R candidates is, they've shown no indication of where they think regulation becomes necessary. The only conclusion I can draw from that until I hear otherwise, is that the objectivism train is still rolling strong, in spite of one of its biggest conductors (Greenspan) jumping off. I don't get it.

I'm against government being a player in nearly all markets, but there has to come a point where laws keeping business of any variety in check in some way has to come into play. Effing volumes can be written about why that is an absolute necessity, yet all I hear is the same "all regulation and all taxes bad!" chorus. Makes me want to bash my head against a wall.
Click to expand...

I agree with all this, but right now they are playing to their base.

There are MAJOR rumblings here in Texas that Perry is going to be the next one in, and he will be a BIG player immediately. Conventional wisdom in Austin is that he is lining up indorsements including Palin and Guliani, who represent two spectrums of the Republican party.
 
#79
#79
GAVol said:
The most unbelievable part of the movie . . . Tim Geitner has the names of the major investment banks written on note cards laid out on his desk and he literally matches them up and then calls their CEOs and tells them to cut a deal and merge.
Click to expand...
Not too far from how it happened. In truth, he basically got all the major CEO's in a room, lined them up alphabetically and told them what the frak the deal was.

volinbham said:
Kinda like how I feel when Dems claim government programs are the answer and bash business and rich people.
Click to expand...
All true.

GAVol said:
They're competing in a Republican primary and talking to the base. What the heck do you expect from them?
Click to expand...
Too much, I guess.
 
#80
#80
NEOCON said:
So you blame the markets but make no mention of Dodd or daffy duck? Odd to leave out the two major players who handed the knives to the banks and helped turn the American population around to face the other way.
Click to expand...

You talking about the Dodd-Frank?

What I'm talking about happened entirely before that.
 
#81
#81
milohimself said:
Average Youtube idiots, BUT...

Many people seem to have the wrong idea here. Is growth out of the recession slow under Obama? Yes. Did he get us there? Ummm... No. The credit market was far too easy, but anybody who believes that deregulation wasn't a significant, direct cause of the mess we've been in is full of ****.

It baffles me how so many people can analyze that situation and be so willing to point only one finger, and it always seems to come down to either credit became to easy to get, or rampant deregulation happened... Anybody who says only one of those things is to blame is being a giant dillhole.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My philosophy is that I don't trust anyone, companies, individuals, government, etc, to do the right thing when no one is watching. The government shouldn't be an iron fist though. Their function is to serve as a referee to keep the playing field even. Total deregulation is a recipe for disaster.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#82
#82
JayVols said:
Agreed. My philosophy is that I don't trust anyone, companies, individuals, government, etc, to do the right thing when no one is watching. The government shouldn't be an iron fist though. Their function is to serve as a referee to keep the playing field even. Total deregulation is a recipe for disaster.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

The rub is what is an "even playing field"?

With regard to financial markets I believe most Rs would support regulations that promote transparency and disclosure so risk can be assessed and compared among investment vehicles. Such regulation is consistent with well functioning markets.

Where we get the "even the playing field" hang up is when certain industries are favored (ethanol) via regulation on competitors to promote winners and losers chosen by the government rather than the market.

Short answer - free market advocates aren't anti-regulation. They are anti-market distorting regulations. (see lending laws as a prime example).
 
#83
#83
volinbham said:
The rub is what is an "even playing field"?

With regard to financial markets I believe most Rs would support regulations that promote transparency and disclosure so risk can be assessed and compared among investment vehicles. Such regulation is consistent with well functioning markets.

Where we get the "even the playing field" hang up is when certain industries are favored (ethanol) via regulation on competitors to promote winners and losers chosen by the government rather than the market.

Short answer - free market advocates aren't anti-regulation. They are anti-market distorting regulations. (see lending laws as a prime example).
Click to expand...

I see regulation as being your 1st description. Federal subsidies for massive agri-businesses should be dropped.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#86
#86
volinbham said:
So you are in line with Republican thinking - good to know :)
Click to expand...

Some stuff, yes. Some stuff, no. I think the same scenario can be looked at different ways and solutions applied to some situations and not others. It's situational to me.

I see the world and our nation's challenges in many different shades of gray. Very little is black and white to me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#87
#87
2 very imporant questions somehow missed her, "deep dish or thin crust"? and "coke or pepsi"?
 
#88
#88
JayVols said:
Some stuff, yes. Some stuff, no. I think the same scenario can be looked at different ways and solutions applied to some situations and not others. It's situational to me.

I see the world and our nation's challenges in many different shades of gray. Very little is black and white to me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It's easier for people to live in black and white.
 
#89
#89
volinbham said:
The tax cuts for the rich caused this depression (thought it was a recession) but Obama was "wise" to extend them? Brilliant.
!
Click to expand...

i've heard this repeatably from liberals that the bush tax cuts caused the recession. yet not a one of them can logically explain to me how tax cuts could hurt the economy in the short term.
 
#90
#90
droski said:
i've heard this repeatably from liberals that the bush tax cuts caused the recession. yet not a one of them can logically explain to me how tax cuts could hurt the economy in the short term.
Click to expand...

Or why Obama then extended them and claims this is part of his strategy to fix the economy. If they are so bad why did he repeat the mistake?
 
#92
#92
I've never understood how lowered taxes in return can cause a recession, unless one is trying to argue a progressive system and higher rates would lead to countercyclical policy. (And even then, that is during a vibrant market) In the end, that is nothing more than textbook rambling. A great deal of those clamoring that we are entering a new gilded age in America are doing it merely from ideological means and even the very bright and usual chart-wizards have little to nothing to support their claims.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top