So Do You Think The Problem Solver Is More Regulations?

[don_equis]

Yeah years after the so called laws were put into place to make it ilegal to have economics monopolies, somehow the corporations found ways around them. But it also seems like with all this goverment buying and owning we are going back to having monopolies?? So do you think the problem in our soon to dissapear "free market" and "socio-economic system" is that we need more agencies with more regulations? Or could it be that the regulations were in place they just were never or were partially enforced? Do you all think the Goverment should start also regulating more the internet? what can you say? what can you see in it? Because trust me it seems to me that this administration is trying to be a permanent fixed dailly part of your life.

 

[Philbert]

Some people see the dark clouds gathering, hear the far away thunder, and put the top up on their convertible.
Others wail and lament that it always seems to rain whenever they leave the top down.

Since there are lots of "after the fact" wailers around, we'll have to wait and see what the future brings...and all the sour grapes, hand-wringing, and crying about why did this happen, and why didn't someone put a stop to it?

 

[CunningStunts]

The job of "government" is to encourage "good" behaviors from people, and discourage "bad" behavior. We can argue all day about what is good vs. bad, but let's just generally say we all agree 95% of the time of what this means to most people. The government has to use this power sparingly, and with great care, for history is NOT on it's side when it comes to expanding this power into all facets of life, for it tends to not stop until it is replaced with a new system. Unfortunately, this restraint is not being shown, much to the glee of citizen in the US who want Washington to "fix" all of our problem. The other dangerous precent I've noticed is that the Feds seem to be rewarding "bad" behavior (bailouts of bad companies, bailouts of people who bought too much house, etc) and punishing "good" behavior (pay your bills on time, didn't run your company into the ground, etc.). On the surface, when you carry these actions to a logical conclusion, it seems to point to a massive system being put in place to truly make us all "equal." That is what scares me to death (literally).

 

[Facetious]

Gentlemen - This is a timeless piece and it is never to be forgotten. As the government continues to compliment itself with the ability to further regulate us and in turn, impede our ability to make our own choices, there is no question in my mind that a tyranny awaits us.

I would go so far as to suggest that there are such individuals in the government who design legislation very carefully so they can help create additional deficiencies (crisis) along the way thus, causing the call for additional future bureaucracies to form because of the intentional errors made in the beginning !

The government has gone well above and beyond the duties for which it was originally intended.

Last month, the camel's nose was in the tent, today his head is in the tent ! :swat: Kick . . . Smack !

Mosquito repel aerosol + cig lighter = Flame :flame: throwing TORCH !! Out ! Out of my tent I say, you crazy camel !

:flame: WHooosshhhhhh


Sorry for that, I needed some relief.

In closing - Just plug in Rahm Emanuel's formula "take advantage of crisis to do some things that you wouldn't otherwise had been able to take advantage of had there not been a crisis" into any political issue today -from "global warming" to the illegal alien influx that bankrupts hospitals so the gumment CAN socialize our health care system ! Follow the freaking money !

 

[tiger1977]

The regulation (aka stimulus package) that the government is doing now is trying to recreate the very same conditions that lead up to this current crisis. They want to stimulate spending, and not growth. We are a service economy, but we need to be a goods producing economy. Americans need to borrow money to produce, not to spend. We need a recession to clear up years of careless spending and no saving. We need to stop the stimulus/bailouts and let the free market work for us, and us not work against it. We need to suffer through high interest rates, and not delay this any longer. Americans need to understand that Ronald Reagan was correct in saying that “government is not the solution, government is the problem.” What is happening now, without the stimulus or bailouts, is the solution and not the problem. If Obama gets his way, which he appears he is, socialism will prevail and we will have a modern New Deal, which is bad in all aspects. Obama is using the very same failed policies that Bush used when he went into office. We do not need big government to solve this. We need a smaller government, and one that will not intervene into the free market.

 

[The Paulinator]

I vote yes on the Tenth Amendment.

Remember in 2005, in Louisiana, a certain natural disaster occurred. Local and State governments failed to respond properly (or at all)? They began screaming for FEMA (a federal agency) and inquiring as to why the federal government was not micro-managing its residents lives.

Now we have a new regime, I mean Executive Branch Manager, who seems intently focused on micro-management, and not missing any opportunity to overstep what he is bound to by Article II. Where does it say that the president can fire the CEO of a private company? Or merely prolong a business from its enevitable failure by throwing good money after bad? That is nothing short of fascism.

The fed had "invested" in these businesses and fully intends to run them...as efficiently and as profitably as government can.


Wait, What?



EDIT: I meant to say "no"

 

[D-rock]

All the bailout money is bad, but what bothers me the most is not all the money. If we were handing out all that money and then actually fixing the problem with our economy I would probably think it was worth it. I can understand a country making a true investment in it's future, even at high cost. Instead we are just staving off disaster for a little while. If we are going to give out that kind of money I want to actually fix the underlying flawed system for the benefit of everybody, especially the poor and people most screwed over by it. Also if the government has to bail out a business I think they should just pretty much take it over at that point if it's too big or important to fail instead of giving money the idiots that ran it. I think we are trying to half ass it both ways and it's not going to work any better than before. If life has taught me something, it’s that half-assed solution to problems don’t work. It's like we know the system is starting to crumble but because it's the way we have been for a long time we don't want to come to grips with it.

Part of the problem is that free market economics are broken. (Or really never worked like people thought they did in the first place.) I'm still amazed at the people out there that treat it near religiously and that think as long as you follow it everything will magically fix itself and come out better for everybody in the end. I'm sorry to say it doesn't work that way. America has sold out it's citizens to business, the "world economy, and the elite for so long that the inevitable ramifications are starting to come about, and were a worse country because of it. It has and always will be a system for funneling money into as few hands as can be gotten away with, and unless you one of the very lucky minority of people out there that probably isn't you.

 

[calpoon]

Sure. why not? the private sector showed that they sure as hell can't run the economy on their own, so it's necessary for someone else to step in and take over.

If it proves a success, then that will be good. If it proves a failure then it really won't make any difference, it will just be a different failure than the one that was already happening.

And next time around they'll just get someone else to reverse all the policies of Obama, just like he did for Bush. Isn't that supposed to be what a president does? Try to fix things that need fixing. What's the point of having a president or a government that does nothing? I wasn't aware that the republican party were all anarchists.

I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but for all you people crying out about the fascist Obama, where the fuck were you for the last 8 years while this country crumbled? I didn't hear jack shit about the government dropping the ball then. Could it maybe be that you people are full of shit and are part of the problem and are just pissed off because your guy isn't power anymore? sure seems like it me. There isn't any other excuse for these so called libertarians.

 

[bustybbwlover]

i don't think more regulations just so there are more regulations will necessarily fix anything. rather it seems like the ultimate solution would rather be appropriate and appropriately enforced regulation.

 

[Roughneck]

The job of "government" is to encourage "good" behaviors from people, and discourage "bad" behavior.

Ummm, permit me to disagree.

The "job" of "the government" is to:
(a) Stay the hell outta my life
(b) Stay the hell outta the lives of others
(c) Act as a "referee" - as an arbiter in disputes.

It's supposed to safeguard individual liberty and property - That's frigging it!!!

but let's just generally say we all agree 95% of the time of what this means to most people.

I'm not sure I agree.

The government has to use this power sparingly, and with great care, for history is NOT on it's side when it comes to expanding this power into all facets of life, for it tends to not stop until it is replaced with a new system.

And yet you argue for government to expand and increase it's power?

Unfortunately, this restraint is not being shown, much to the glee of citizen in the US who want Washington to "fix" all of our problem. The other dangerous precent I've noticed is that the Feds seem to be rewarding "bad" behavior (bailouts of bad companies, bailouts of people who bought too much house, etc) and punishing "good" behavior (pay your bills on time, didn't run your company into the ground, etc.). On the surface, when you carry these actions to a logical conclusion, it seems to point to a massive system being put in place to truly make us all "equal." That is what scares me to death (literally).

I agree with your here.

I'm an old carcass, but I worry about my children ...

cheers,

 

[georges]

Socialism isn't the solution to the problem. The solution to the problems are closing the border definitively with Mexico, eradicating the most notorious gangs of America, and not assisting other lazy parasites or leechers that are unwilling to work.
Calpoon, good behavior is not kissing Obama's administration ass and what it tells you to do, but bad behavior is forgetting what your country is and what are the values and ideals you stood and fought for.
Obama represents a certain population of people, he doesn't represent all Americans. When your president represents the ghetto crowd, students, the teachers and the poor, he doesn't represent everyone.
The ones who wanted a socialist America and an America favorising the Ghetto crowd and all should perhaps ask themselves if they are not hypocritical or very unamerican by thinking that they will be socially and financially assisted at the expense of hardworking and honest citizens.
We had that 27 years of socialist governments in France and the result was catastrophic, France has gone bankrupt because of 27 years of assisting and financing some parasites and even gave them food and shelter, this at the expense of hardworking, law abiding and honest citizens.
When you want something, you have to work hard for desserving it, this is called meritocracy and I am all for it. We are not in the times, where people used to be fed like babies with a silver spoon in their mouths. Now, we are in a highly individualistic society and highly opportunist society, that is not a bad things because you see who is who and who is willing to succeed or not. None owes you nothing. Communautarism is a value that is plaguing democracies.

 

[Roughneck]

Socialism isn't the solution to the problem.

I agree.

The solution to the problems are closing the border definitively with Mexico, eradicating the most notorious gangs of America, and not assisting other lazy parasites or leechers that are unwilling to work.

Any solutions as to how to bring this about? I'm all ears...

bad behavior is forgetting what your country is and what are the values and ideals you stood and fought for.

Such as?

When your president represents the ghetto crowd, students, the teachers and the poor, he doesn't represent everyone.

Well, yes. Technically he doesn't "represent everyone"...

... but I sincerely doubt if McCain/Palin "represented everyone" either.

Not to mention the fact that McCain was a big anti-gun politician and he played fast and loose with many rules.

Don't even get me started on how he "sold" his former comrades from the Vietnam War!!!

The ones who wanted a socialist America and an America favorising the Ghetto crowd and all should perhaps ask themselves if they are not hypocritical

Georges, I'm an old, old man. I don't understand your use of the expression "Getto crowd".

by thinking that they will be socially and financially assisted at the expense of hardworking and honest citizens.
We had that 27 years of socialist governments in France and the result was catastrophic, France has gone bankrupt because of 27 years of assisting and financing some parasites and even gave them food and shelter, this at the expense of hardworking, law abiding and honest citizens.

I agree with you Georges that government handouts are not the solution.

Now, we are in a highly individualistic society and highly opportunist society, that is not a bad things because you see who is who and who is willing to succeed or not. None owes you nothing.

YES!!!! Especially your line "None owes you anything", I think that's spot on!!

cheers,

 

[georges]

I agree.

1) Any solutions as to how to bring this about? I'm all ears...

2) Such as?

3) Well, yes. Technically he doesn't "represent everyone"...
... but I sincerely doubt if McCain/Palin "represented everyone" either.
Not to mention the fact that McCain was a big anti-gun politician and he played fast and loose with many rules.
Don't even get me started on how he "sold" his former comrades from the Vietnam War!!!

4) Georges, I'm an old, old man. I don't understand your use of the expression "Getto crowd".

5) I agree with you Georges that government handouts are not the solution.

6) YES!!!! Especially your line "None owes you anything", I think that's spot on!!

cheers,

1) Well, USA should be very selective like Canada about the immigrants they are accepting and see what these offer as labor work force and as an added value, culturally and also see if these are adapting well to the American way of living and to the American society.

2) Forgetting that the founding fathers fought for the 2nd amendment and people wanting seeing it banned or repealed aren't worth of their citizenship, also not being a patriot and not supporting your troops is a thing that anyone who dislikes/dispises his/her country does.

3) I know that.

4) Well the Ghetto crowd is the people that live in shitty suburbs like the bronx, the watts or the queens and that more than often get involved in gang violence and that support enlisting or enrolling young people and mostly teenagers in gangs. The ghetto crowd also includes people favoring and being fanboys of gangsta culture, radical islam with the black nation of islam party, black panthers and other shitty gangs and ideas that go against all America's interests. The ghetto crowd also likes selling drugs and is in favor of an underground economy and selling some kind of drugs freely.

 

[don_equis]

Some people see the dark clouds gathering, hear the far away thunder, and put the top up on their convertible.
Others wail and lament that it always seems to rain whenever they leave the top down.

half full or half empty cup?

Since there are lots of "after the fact" wailers around, we'll have to wait and see what the future brings...and all the sour grapes, hand-wringing, and crying about why did this happen, and why didn't someone put a stop to it?

Because this Nation has become a reactionary nation and there's are very little proactive actions. That's why there's a warning lil voice that get's ignored and then comes the "crisis" and you hear "why did this happen?" "what could have we done to avoid it" The lil voice right now says a few things:

1. Enforcing the past regulations was the key, adding new regulations (later on will be ignored anyways because of lack of manpower to enforce it or people that don't understand the regulation itself,etc) to complicate matters is not the solution.

Please excuse my typos my keyboard needs a bail out....

2. Printing all this massive money (last time I checked a billion dollars = one thousand millions!) starting with Bush under the tabel bail out and Obama's is the "worst economical crisis since the Great Depression" bail out money,suplemental budget and the budget itself is going to kill the dollar!

3. When the dollar dies and super inflation hits, how are we going to pay for all these already expensive "going green" commodities?

Gentlemen - This is a timeless piece and it is never to be forgotten. As the government continues to compliment itself with the ability to further regulate us and in turn, impede our ability to make our own choices, there is no question in my mind that a tyranny awaits us.

I would go so far as to suggest that there are such individuals in the government who design legislation very carefully so they can help create additional deficiencies (crisis) along the way thus, causing the call for additional future bureaucracies to form because of the intentional errors made in the beginning !

The government has gone well above and beyond the duties for which it was originally intended.

Last month, the camel's nose was in the tent, today his head is in the tent ! :swat: Kick . . . Smack !

Mosquito repel aerosol + cig lighter = Flame :flame: throwing TORCH !! Out ! Out of my tent I say, you crazy camel !

:flame: WHooosshhhhhh


Sorry for that, I needed some relief.

In closing - Just plug in Rahm Emanuel's formula "take advantage of crisis to do some things that you wouldn't otherwise had been able to take advantage of had there not been a crisis" into any political issue today -from "global warming" to the illegal alien influx that bankrupts hospitals so the gumment CAN socialize our health care system ! Follow the freaking money !

Why is there a camel in your tent? I mean it could have been a cow...lol

Sure. why not? the private sector showed that they sure as hell can't run the economy on their own, so it's necessary for someone else to step in and take over.

Maybe the goverment lacked the manpower or the oversight to really enforce the old regulations that have already been in place. Or big lobbying groups in Congress were getting their way?

If it proves a success, then that will be good. If it proves a failure then it really won't make any difference, it will just be a different failure than the one that was already happening.

What makes me believe that the lobbying groups are not there again designing the "new and improved regulations".

And next time around they'll just get someone else to reverse all the policies of Obama, just like he did for Bush. Isn't that supposed to be what a president does? Try to fix things that need fixing. What's the point of having a president or a government that does nothing? I wasn't aware that the republican party were all anarchists.

Presidents do stuff all the time, the sign the laws into place, that's way they are the "Executive Branch" they are not to be the "Executive HMO, GM, Stock broker, Wash your hands so you don't get the swine flu, car designer, main inventor, in your life everyday, I can do everything and anything" president.

I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but for all you people crying out about the fascist Obama, where the fuck were you for the last 8 years while this country crumbled? I didn't hear jack shit about the government dropping the ball then. Could it maybe be that you people are full of shit and are part of the problem and are just pissed off because your guy isn't power anymore? sure seems like it me. There isn't any other excuse for these so called libertarians.

Let's see I was serving in the Army in Korea from 2000-2001, I missed the Bush/Gore election did not know enough about both of them. I had returned from my first deployment in Iraq back in 2004 and was pissed of enough at the Bush/Rumsfeld/Powel bullshit war that I voted for a less radical (when compared to current Obama) horse face Kerry. So Bush won my ass got sent back to Iraq from 2005-2006 as a price of this nation choosing Bush again. But make no mistake I saw the bullshit again and did not voted for Obama. You see my theory you don't gro one extreme to the other, we need a real centrist or close to it, we did not get it in the past 8 years and we are not getting it now. Now I don't think you really believe that it took 8 years for this economic mayhem to happen, you got to dig further back my friend.

i don't think more regulations just so there are more regulations will necessarily fix anything. rather it seems like the ultimate solution would rather be appropriate and appropriately enforced regulation.

Exactly! Let's make more laws into place but hire fewer uncorrupted policemen to enforce them!


Now what regilations are in place to account for this huge printing and spending of billions that are out there?? I am pretty sure the banks and lobbying groups found plenty of loop holes and are taking advantage of them!

 

[Jane Burgess]

The regulation (aka stimulus package) that the government is doing now is trying to recreate the very same conditions that lead up to this current crisis. They want to stimulate spending, and not growth. We are a service economy, but we need to be a goods producing economy. Americans need to borrow money to produce, not to spend. We need a recession to clear up years of careless spending and no saving. We need to stop the stimulus/bailouts and let the free market work for us, and us not work against it. We need to suffer through high interest rates, and not delay this any longer. Americans need to understand that Ronald Reagan was correct in saying that “government is not the solution, government is the problem.” What is happening now, without the stimulus or bailouts, is the solution and not the problem. If Obama gets his way, which he appears he is, socialism will prevail and we will have a modern New Deal, which is bad in all aspects. Obama is using the very same failed policies that Bush used when he went into office. We do not need big government to solve this. We need a smaller government, and one that will not intervene into the free market.

Amen. :thumbsup:

 

[don_equis]

Dollar hits '09 low on rating fears; stocks dip

LONDON (Reuters) - The dollar fell to a 2009 low on Friday as fears intensified that the United States could lose its triple-A rating, while renewed caution about the world economy and banks prompted Asian and European stocks to slip.

The dollar's latest decline started when ratings agency Standard & Poor's cut its ratings outlook on Britain to negative from stable, stoking fears other AAA-rated countries which are running huge debt levels could share a similar fate.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Dollar-hits-09-low-on-rating-rb-15325222.html?.v=3

Point number three in my group of concerns of these massive printing of money

 

[historylover]

Here's one of our biggest issues, I think: how can government foster a free market wherein competition keeps prices and wages at a natural equilibrium while simultaneously discouraging certain business practices with regulation that controls the market? Unless the government actively fosters the establishment and growth of small businesses in ways similar to its assistances to corporations, it cannot continually be free market-friendly and regulation-enforcing successfully. Competition will not work in the long run without small business growth nor will corporations be more humanistic without regulation. Competition is too fragile and the corporation too mechanical.

I agree with a tiger1977 that economic growth, not increased spending, should be the driver behind the stimulus package. Yet, I ask this: What must come first? We cannot simply spend our way free, but without consumerism to drive growth, it will not happen. Consumerism fosters job growth. This poster does, though point out the fatal flaw behind the consumerism of the (hopefully) past; Debt was issued for spending, not producing. If we could re-direct debt somehow - or our idea behind its purpose, our economy would be better. But, in the short term, we cannot, which leads me to my next point.
Those who say that we should suffer through higher interest rates and such are, I believe, assuming tough love works most effectively. Yet I think that advocating responsible spending while regulating corporate policies on accounts receivable/debt collection is the best medicine. Until one learns to fish they need to be given one or they will starve. If each debt payment becomes mostly interest revenue, then when will the principal decrease.

 

[tiger1977]

Yet I think that advocating responsible spending while regulating corporate policies on accounts receivable/debt collection is the best medicine. Until one learns to fish they need to be given one or they will starve. If each debt payment becomes mostly interest revenue, then when will the principal decrease.

Learning to fish = growing up and learning responsibility.

Debt collection = only to those who do not pay their debt.

Why punish those who make their payment on time? Why reward those who do not? The ones who are late with payments, or do not make them at all, are the ones screwing the system for the rest of us. They don't need to be given a "fish". That should have been taught this by their parents. It is a basic lesson of growing up.