Just What We Need, More Bureaucracy - Thanks Mr. President

[Cruise]

Democrats to push through banking overhaul quickly

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Anne Flaherty, Associated Press Writer –

WASHINGTON – Democratic leaders have committed to enacting by the end of the year the biggest regulatory revision to the U.S. financial system since the 1930s — an undertaking so ambitious it has some lawmakers worried about missteps.

"We have to evaluate it, weigh it, slow it down and make sure we do it right," said Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee. "Because if we don't, we will pay dearly."

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was expected to outline the administration's plan on Thursday before the Senate panel and the House Financial Services Committee.

The proposal is aimed at filling in regulatory gaps and increasing oversight of the financial markets to prevent another economic calamity.

"We don't want to stifle innovation," said President Barack Obama in a speech Wednesday.

"But I'm convinced that by setting out clear rules of the road and ensuring transparency and fair dealings, we will actually promote a more vibrant market," he added.

Obama wants to empower the Federal Reserve to oversee the largest and most influential financial firms. He also wants to create a council of federal regulators, chaired by the treasury secretary, to monitor risk across the broader market.

A new consumer protection agency would be created to prevent deceptive practices by such companies as credit card lenders and mortgage brokers.

The proposal was well-received among Democrats on Capitol Hill, who said it would prevent another round of bank bailouts and protect consumers from predatory lending practices.

"We regard this as very pro-market," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who chairs the House Financial Services Committee. "Unless you have investors that are well-protected, you don't have a market."

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said there would be "some debate," but "I think we're all seeking the same results."

But a swift legislative endorsement of the plan could be difficult.

Dodd, D-Conn., is leading a major overhaul of the nation's health care system, while the Senate also faces a debate on whether to confirm Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

In addition to the Senate's packed schedule, several lawmakers, including Dodd, have questioned whether Obama's proposal relies too heavily on the Federal Reserve and expressed concern that the Fed, as an independent agency, doesn't answer to Congress.

"It's certainly worthy of a thorough and full-throated debate and discussion as to whether or not that's a better alternative than vesting the Fed," Dodd told reporters after Obama's speech. "There's not a lot of confidence in the Fed at this point."

Geithner told reporters at a briefing that the administration had looked at a range of alternatives to giving the Fed expanded powers and had come to the conclusion that "we do not believe there is a plausible alternative."

Turf fights among lawmakers were also likely, as the plan leaves in question who should regulate derivatives like the credit-default swaps that felled American International Group Inc.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Securities and Exchange Commission should have the job, calling it a "stronger regulator" than the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Senate Democratic aides said the plan was to take up the bill this fall, regardless of whether the House has had a chance to act.

Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., who chairs a House Financial Services subcommittee, said he was concerned that a rush job will hand the controls to the Senate.

"If we rush this thing too much, we won't have the opportunity for everyone to buy in," he said.

House Republicans said Obama's plan would go too far and bury the market in unnecessary regulation.

Senate Republicans were less dismissive but stopped far short of endorsing the proposal. Shelby and Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., questioned aspects of the plan but said they hoped to work with Democrats to make it stronger.

 

[VegasGuy]

This bureaucracy we need. We didn't need to get rid of the Glass-Steagall Act but when we did, Wall Street became a a big ass liability for us.

Were you around during the big housing bubble break or did you and rush just miss it?

-VG

 

[Cruise]

This bureaucracy we need. We didn't need to get rid of the Glass-Steagall Act but when we did, Wall Street became a a big ass liability for us.

Were you around during the big housing bubble break or did you and rush just miss it?

-VG

So...

you think the very people who did nothing to stop the housing mess are the very people who can fix it?

 

[BigUnc]

I'm still trying to digest this and get a better understanding of it but what I'm seeing is not an overhaul but a re-arranging of the agencies reponsible for regulatory oversight into a single structure with the Federal reserve having some sort of final say so. 1 or 2 minor agencies will probably close up shop but all the others retain their authorities granted to them by Congress and as far as I know the Federal Reserve cannot usurp that authority. Those agencies will protect their power viciously.

If this comes to pass look to the example of the creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security as to how this probably will play out. Expect years of bureaucratic infighting, jockeying for position, mismanagement,confusion and add in "Wall Street" trying to throw wrench's into the process while at the same time trying to find ways around them.

 

[actinanass]

So...

you think the very people who did nothing to stop the housing mess are the very people who can fix it?

remember, when there's a problem, government is the answer. According to VG's logic...

 

[VegasGuy]

So...

you think the very people who did nothing to stop the housing mess are the very people who can fix it?

Man, cut that shit out. You're smarter than hanniety or actinass with these questions. This ain't North Korea or China. What do you mean did nothing? What could they do? The US government is not authorized to do anything the laws don't allow them to do. That includes oversight.

You hear the squeals about keeping the government at arms length.

But there are too many crooks on Wallstreet. That was one of the reasons why Glass Steagall was put in place to begin with.

However with the repeal of Glass Steagall during the Clinton years, that was the linchpin that set in motion some bullshit on the nation started by Reagan years, that forced the government to cut Wall street a check. Add to that 8 years of a buffoons war that killed thousands of Iraqi families we have yet to compensate them for, the feds need to keep an eye on this shit.

Don't let fox and assact blank you. They'll try to run the astonishment routine on you like all this is news to them.

-VG

 

[actinanass]

Man, cut that shit out. You're smarter than hanniety or actinass with these questions. This ain't North Korea or China. What do you mean did nothing? What could they do? The US government is not authorized to do anything the laws don't allow them to do. That includes oversight.

You hear the squeals about keeping the government at arms length.

But there are too many crooks on Wallstreet. That was one of the reasons why Glass Steagall was put in place to begin with.

However with the repeal of Glass Steagall during the Clinton years, that was the linchpin that set in motion some bullshit on the nation started by Reagan years, that forced the government to cut Wall street a check. Add to that 8 years of a buffoons war that killed thousands of Iraqi families we have yet to compensate them for, the feds need to keep an eye on this shit.

Don't let fox and assact blank you. They'll try to run the astonishment routine on you like all this is news to them.

-VG

I think you misread his questions.

I find it funny that you rather let one set of crooks deal with the economy because you don't like the current crooks. I guess congress is more qualified to deal with our economy than...lets say.......WALL STREET.

BTW, you still haven't answered my question.

You say my name, but bypass my question. So typical...

 

[Lamarr]

What could they do? The US government is not authorized to do anything the laws don't allow them to do. That includes oversight.

But there are too many crooks on Wallstreet. That was one of the reasons why Glass Steagall was put in place to begin with.

-VG

First, the govt needs to stay out of the economy. Allow the people to run it, that is freedom. No person can control vibrant economy, hell, Greenspan & Bernanke been tryin 4 the last 10 yrs and they still jackin it up!

I agree with you, there are too many crooks on Wall Street but the answer is not more regulation, the answer is to enforce the law, simple! If there is a need for regulation, it is on the Federal Reserve. They print money "out of thin air"

The Federal Reserve is an independent, unaccountable central bank for the US, that charges us interest on the paper they create from nothin'

 

[thoughtone]

First, the govt needs to stay out of the economy. Allow the people to run it, that is freedom. No person can control vibrant economy, hell, Greenspan & Bernanke been tryin 4 the last 10 yrs and they still jackin it up!

The economy needs regulation to maintain common rules for all of the players. The problem is that there are two sets of rules. Socialized liabilities for the general public and privatized gains for the corporations and wealthy!

I agree with you, there are too many crooks on Wall Street but the answer is not more regulation, the answer is to enforce the law, simple! If there is a need for regulation, it is on the Federal Reserve. They print money "out of thin air"

You are contradicting yourself. How can you be against regulation, but be for law enforcement? Law enforcement is regulation. This is the confusion I have with so called libertarians. They want there freedom the way they want it.

The Federal Reserve is an independent, unaccountable central bank for the US, that charges us interest on the paper they create from nothin'

The Fed needs to be taken down! They are no more than a lobbyist for the international banks. Lamarr, you and I have common goals, but different opinions on how to get there. Consumer protection is needed, but Geithner is NOT the person to have any parts of this! He has shown is loyalty to the Fed in this entire economic situation. Consumer protection needs to be stronger than what they are proposing with oversight over the Fed!

 

[thoughtone]

So...

you think the very people who did nothing to stop the housing mess are the very people who can fix it?

Do you think the very people that created and participated in the housing mess are the very people who can fix it?

 

[thoughtone]

remember, when there's a problem, government is the answer. According to VG's logic...

At least the people have the ability to become INFORMED and vote the suckers out. Corporations and business answer to no one but profit! If there is profit in screwing people over, try protesting to a far off CEO, corporate board or business owner. You will get tossed in jail and no one is accountable. Whether you participate in it or not or make an uninformed vote, politicians are accountable every election cycle.

 

[thoughtone]

I think you misread his questions.

I find it funny that you rather let one set of crooks deal with the economy because you don't like the current crooks. I guess congress is more qualified to deal with our economy than...lets say.......WALL STREET.

BTW, you still haven't answered my question.

You say my name, but bypass my question. So typical...

Evidently, have you seen the mess Wall Street is in? If the so called economic experts (Wall Street) fucked up the economy, may be they weren’t that smart in the first place, or skirted outside of the RULES, due to lack of REGULATION. When Wall Street fucks up who do you go to, the REGULATORS. But the Wall Street crooks were put in charge as the REGULATORS. May be we should elect politicians that won’t appoint Wall Street crooks as REGULATORS!

Does this answer your question?

 

[Cruise]

The New York Fed basically is the fiduciary agent of the Treasury department and thus the US government.

The New York Fed actually controls the nation's supply of currency and bank access to credit.

The New York Fed let Wall Street banks create a credit bubble (housing, personal, business) leading to the collapse of the banking sector.

The President of the New York Fed during this time was Timothy Geithner (2003-2009).

The current secretary of the Treasury is Timothy Geithner.

The same person who was in charge during the greatest bank collapse in US history is supposed to be trusted to fix it?

 

[thoughtone]

The New York Fed basically is the fiduciary agent of the Treasury department and thus the US government.

The New York Fed actually controls the nation's supply of currency and bank access to credit.

The New York Fed let Wall Street banks create a credit bubble (housing, personal, business) leading to the collapse of the banking sector.

The President of the New York Fed during this time was Timothy Geithner (2003-2009).

The current secretary of the Treasury is Timothy Geithner.

The same person who was in charge during the greatest bank collapse in US history is supposed to be trusted to fix it?

but Geithner is NOT the person to have any parts of this! He has shown is loyalty to the Fed in this entire economic situation. Consumer protection needs to be stronger than what they are proposing with oversight over the Fed!

I wish I would have said that?

 

[Lamarr]

You are contradicting yourself. How can you be against regulation, but be for law enforcement? Law enforcement is regulation. This is the confusion I have with so called libertarians. They want there freedom the way they want it.

No contradiction, What Obama is proposing is the Federal Reserve overseeing activities of financial institutions, the disagreement is that its nothing more than a police matter. We didn't have to create another regulatory body to go after Madoff, right? If the people are insistent on regulation, start at the top and let the free market determine interest rates and expansion of credit instead of the Fed. Simple, the conclusion would lead to lenders seeking out creditworthy people. What you see today is nothing more than fraud, people should be prosecuted.

Consumer protection is needed, but Geithner is NOT the person to have any parts of this! He has shown is loyalty to the Fed in this entire economic situation. Consumer protection needs to be stronger than what they are proposing with oversight over the Fed!

Thats why interest rates / credit should be determined in the free market. In a free market, lenders would have to understand the risk involved in making that loan. Trust me Thought, the risk of loss always counter-balances the greed for profit. As long as the gov is not involved

 

[thoughtone]

No contradiction, What Obama is proposing is the Federal Reserve overseeing activities of financial institutions, the disagreement is that its nothing more than a police matter. We didn't have to create another regulatory body to go after Madoff, right? If the people are insistent on regulation, start at the top and let the free market determine interest rates and expansion of credit instead of the Fed. Simple, the conclusion would lead to lenders seeking out creditworthy people. What you see today is nothing more than fraud, people should be prosecuted.



Thats why interest rates / credit should be determined in the free market. In a free market, lenders would have to understand the risk involved in making that loan. Trust me Thought, the risk of loss always counter-balances the greed for profit. As long as the gov is not involved

Wasn’t this the case in the 1920s? Then the government had to step in. There is no place where unregulated capitalism works for long.

 

[actinanass]

Evidently, have you seen the mess Wall Street is in? If the so called economic experts (Wall Street) fucked up the economy, may be they weren’t that smart in the first place, or skirted outside of the RULES, due to lack of REGULATION. When Wall Street fucks up who do you go to, the REGULATORS. But the Wall Street crooks were put in charge as the REGULATORS. May be we should elect politicians that won’t appoint Wall Street crooks as REGULATORS!

Does this answer your question?

Yes it does.

Here's something I want to point out to you.

Wall street tends to fix its mess in due time. The last thing you want to do is regulate something, just because you have to look like you are doing something. Let some sectors in wall street fail. Then, make it easier for groups *outside of wall street* to join the fray. Extra regulation only make wall street the more cutthroat.

 

[thoughtone]

Yes it does.

Here's something I want to point out to you.

Wall street tends to fix its mess in due time. The last thing you want to do is regulate something, just because you have to look like you are doing something. Let some sectors in wall street fail. Then, make it easier for groups *outside of wall street* to join the fray. Extra regulation only make wall street the more cutthroat.

Is that your opinion or is this fact. My recollection of history is different. Please site examples.

 

[Lamarr]

Wasn’t this the case in the 1920s? Then the government had to step in. There is no place where unregulated capitalism works for long.

Don't get me lyin' about the 1920's but one of the measures that was put into place was Glass / Steagall. It prevented exactly what we are seeing now (commercial banks working with investment banks). It was a law and not a separate, regulating body like what is being proposed now.

I really believe capitalism works but it must be allowed to work. Unfortunately, that would mean a lot of banks would go out of business but they acted irresponsibly. A recession is the markets way of purging the system of bad business, it's what we need in order to rebuild a healthy economy once again

 

[thoughtone]

Don't get me lyin' about the 1920's but one of the measures that was put into place was Glass / Steagall. It prevented exactly what we are seeing now (commercial banks working with investment banks). It was a law and not a separate, regulating body like what is being proposed now.

I really believe capitalism works but it must be allowed to work. Unfortunately, that would mean a lot of banks would go out of business but they acted irresponsibly. A recession is the markets way of purging the system of bad business, it's what we need in order to rebuild a healthy economy once again

Exposed! Either it works or it doesn’t work. The laws of physical work regardless. They don't need to be allowed to work. In the 1920s capitalism did work and on in to the Great Depression. The winners were the wealthy and the losers were everyone else. That’s the way capitalism works. But the majority of the people were not happy with that system. This is what led to the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution. The haves had it and they were fine with that. But when you’re hungry and don’t have security, those rules don’t seem so equitable. But if only a minority feel that way, then they can be ignored. It is not news and the rules of capitalism can be explained away. But when the majority is pissed, then you understand that capitalism and democracy are two totally separate concepts. Roosevelt saved capitalism from itself in the 1930s. Socialism entered our government in the form of financial and social regulation. So capitalism will work with devastating results. The question is can it work for everyone. You cannot ague history within a bubble.

 

[actinanass]

Is that your opinion or is this fact. My recollection of history is different. Please site examples.

So are you telling me that wall street do not fix its own messes?

BTW, whats your definition of a "mess" when it comes to wall street?

 

[Lamarr]

Exposed! Either it works or it doesn’t work.

So capitalism will work with devastating results. The question is can it work for everyone. You cannot ague history within a bubble.

Na! Capitalism is based on freedom. Socialism discourages initiative & competition. Communism is the opposite of freedom. What you see currently is not capitalism, rather Fascism / Crony Capitalism (govt working with corporations to stifle the people). Of all these models, capitalism provides the best avenue personal financial success and its the model that represents freedom.

As far as the devastating results? Well everybody doesn't suffer the same, it's always people on fixed incomes & the elderly. So we owe it to each other to share info on how this theft from the poor & middle class happens. The theft from the middle class happens through paying interest on debt, income taxes, and most importantly, Inflation of the money supply. When you inflate the money supply, it devalues the savings of hard-working people. Its a silent tax. But the people who get to use the money first make a lot of $$$, then it trickles down to us when the purchasing power has diminished.

Let me challenge you on Regulation! Check it out, Do you know why Phillip Morris supported regulation on the tabacco industry? Because they knew such legislation would stifle competition. With them already being a major player, they are gonna pass the cost on to the consumer. They won't lose any market share but it could very well create a monopoly because they are the only ones who can withstand the costs, Shady huh? So that is the flip side of Regulation but those are the type of unintended consequences that surface when govt intervenes in the free market.

Sorry for hi-jackin the thread. I usually don't type this much

 

[Lamarr]

damn, look what I found. Addressing this very issue!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/v6-ukpAwjkg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/v6-ukpAwjkg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[thoughtone]

Na! Capitalism is based on freedom. Socialism discourages initiative & competition. Communism is the opposite of freedom. What you see currently is not capitalism, rather Fascism / Crony Capitalism (govt working with corporations to stifle the people). Of all these models, capitalism provides the best avenue personal financial success and its the model that represents freedom.

As far as the devastating results? Well everybody doesn't suffer the same, it's always people on fixed incomes & the elderly. So we owe it to each other to share info on how this theft from the poor & middle class happens. The theft from the middle class happens through paying interest on debt, income taxes, and most importantly, Inflation of the money supply. When you inflate the money supply, it devalues the savings of hard-working people. Its a silent tax. But the people who get to use the money first make a lot of $$$, then it trickles down to us when the purchasing power has diminished.

Let me challenge you on Regulation! Check it out, Do you know why Phillip Morris supported regulation on the tabacco industry? Because they knew such legislation would stifle competition. With them already being a major player, they are gonna pass the cost on to the consumer. They won't lose any market share but it could very well create a monopoly because they are the only ones who can withstand the costs, Shady huh? So that is the flip side of Regulation but those are the type of unintended consequences that surface when govt intervenes in the free market.

Sorry for hi-jackin the thread. I usually don't type this much

China is proof that capitalism doesn’t need democracy! Wake up dreamer!

I am familiar with that law. Is that an indictment of regulation or that the tobacco lobby is very good in having their interest made priority. Maybe that illustrates the power business interests and money has over our elected officials. Maybe we should elect some true representatives that have the public interests at heart and limit the power of money and business interests influence over our elected officials. How about 100% public campaign financing. But the Supreme Court ruled that money is speech. Talk about the system needing change!

 

[ronmch20]

Mr

Man, cut that shit out. You're smarter than hanniety or actinass with these questions. This ain't North Korea or China. What do you mean did nothing? What could they do? The US government is not authorized to do anything the laws don't allow them to do. That includes oversight.

You hear the squeals about keeping the government at arms length.

But there are too many crooks on Wallstreet. That was one of the reasons why Glass Steagall was put in place to begin with.

However with the repeal of Glass Steagall during the Clinton years, that was the linchpin that set in motion some bullshit on the nation started by Reagan years, that forced the government to cut Wall street a check. Add to that 8 years of a buffoons war that killed thousands of Iraqi families we have yet to compensate them for, the feds need to keep an eye on this shit.

Don't let fox and assact blank you. They'll try to run the astonishment routine on you like all this is news to them.

-VG

VG you are wasting your time on these two, Actinanass is just as his name implies.

 

[thoughtone]

Re: Mr

VG you are wasting your time on these two, Actinanass is just as his name implies.

Ya think?

 

[actinanass]

Re: Mr

VG you are wasting your time on these two, Actinanass is just as his name implies.

Well can you debate me on the issues? Rather than try to discount me because I have a sense of humor about my name on here?

BTW, when the last time you post anything on here........????

 

[Lamarr]

China is proof that capitalism doesn’t need democracy! Wake up dreamer!

Terrible example. They have adopted some capitalistic principles but it's still a highly-managed society.

I am familiar with that law. Is that an indictment of regulation or that the tobacco lobby is very good in having their interest made priority. Maybe that illustrates the power business interests and money has over our elected officials.

I think you see it is both, a knock on regulation & credit to their lobbying efforts. But follow me, the regulations make it harder for competition to enter the market, therefore the monopolies evolve because of the lack of competition. When I look at most of your posts, you discuss your dissatisfaction with corporations (and I agree with you for the most part) but the only solution in your eyes, is to tax them, thats backwards because they now have incentive to offshore their operations! The way to bring these corporations down to size is to allow competition. This is exactly how companies like Philip Morris, Merck, Halliburton, Wal-Mart, etc. operate.
CAFE standards killed our Auto Industry.

You can look at case after case where regulations have contributed to all the conditions that you and I despise. What I am in favor of, is enforcing the law but as you already mentioned, we have some spineless congresspeople who don't have our best interests in mind when they accept 100 stacks from Goldman Sachs.

Simply put, regulation of certain industries prevents the "little guy" from entering the marketplace!

 

[thoughtone]

Terrible example. They have adopted some capitalistic principles but it's still a highly-managed society.

LOL!!! The US is participating in that "LOL, terrible example!" And it is working great for the Chinese. You STILL have not answered my question. Where in the hell does pure laissez faire, libertarian, unregulated no taxes capitalism exist, much less even function successfully? Are you more interested in arguing an academic model of the economy or are you interested in having a society operate successfully? Are you actinass?

 

[Cruise]

LOL!!! The US is participating in that "LOL, terrible example!" And it is working great for the Chinese. You STILL have not answered my question. Where in the hell does pure laissez faire, libertarian, unregulated no taxes capitalism exist, much less even function successfully? Are you more interested in arguing an academic model of the economy or are you interested in having a society operate successfully? Are you actinass?

Almost every country in the world has a central bank, inflationary, fiat, credit-based, profit-motivated, paper currency, income return, gold bullion, free trade, globalist...

economy.

Almost every country in the world has the same f***ing economy! These economies are based on the British fractional-reserve banking model of the Bank of England.

Every economy (but 3) belongs to the IMF!

Every person in the world lives under the control of the Federal Reserve, IMF, BIS, and World Bank.

This scheme will collapse because they always do.

Why?

Because it is a worldwide price fixing scheme. Unlike past times in history, where it just affected a few cultures, countries, or civilizations...

when it fails this time, the whole world economy will crash.

And, Obama is doing his part to make that happen.

Fun times ahead.

 

[Lamarr]

Every economy (but 3) belongs to the IMF!

let me guess Iran, North Korea & (Cuba or Syria)

help me out, I read that somewhere but I can't recall the source

 

[thoughtone]

You guys are making no damn sense. What is the national surplus of China, Japan and Korea? The countries that are getting their asses kicked are the countries that followed the Reagan/Thatcher laissez faire economics model. The US, England Ireland, Iceland... Deregulation of the financial system, which placed the emphasis on out sourcing labor to the bottom is the basis of the crash. As the former chairman of GE, Jack Welch, said, his ideal is to have a barge with a factory on it and sail it to the country with the best deal.

 

[thoughtone]

let me guess Iran, North Korea & (Cuba or Syria)

help me out, I read that somewhere but I can't recall the source

You STILL have not answered my question. Where in the hell does pure laissez faire, libertarian, unregulated no taxes capitalism exist, much less even function successfully?

You are actinass!

 

[Cruise]

let me guess Iran, North Korea & (Cuba or Syria)

help me out, I read that somewhere but I can't recall the source

IMF members

Cuba, Western Sahara, and North Korea.

I only consider these countries because they have essentially developed economies separate from the IMF-system.

You guys are making no damn sense. What is the national surplus of China, Japan and Korea? The countries that are getting their asses kicked are the countries that followed the Reagan/Thatcher laissez faire economics model. The US, England Ireland, Iceland... Deregulation of the financial system, which placed the emphasis on out sourcing labor to the bottom is the basis of the crash. As the former chairman of GE, Jack Welch, said, his ideal is to have a barge with a factory on it and sail it to the country with the best deal.

Oh man.

Don't you see how this whole thing is teetering on collapse.

Your dollars, your credit cards, your insurance, your government are all trying to desperately keep the scam going (like Madoff).

There are two economies in this world... IMF and non-IMF.

 

[CervixThumper]

Paul was saying that we had regulations before and they failed... under the past administration no one was minding the store.

Speaking to a number of people who prosecute white collar crime(both Federal Prosecutors and FBI agents), they stated that the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) created a vacuum on the regulation end. Those agents who policed the waterfront were conscripted, and rebranded for domestic security purposes.

The free market fundamentalists seem to forget one thing...there are humans behind the "market" and you know humans don't play fair. If it's not the government and independent people intervening "not allowing the system" to work, it'll be profiteers looking to game the system.

The other thing that gets ignored in the "let the market work" tagline is the human costs. If we let these industries fail, what would the unemployment rate, foreclosure rate, and countless other measures of disaster have looked like while we were waiting for the reset?