Prev: Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
Next: Insurance companies are there to help us. Yeah, right.
From: BAR on 21 Oct 2009 08:28 In article <4ade6684$0$4958$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 03:32:17 +0000, assimilate wrote: > > On 19-Oct-2009, "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> When you have lobbyists and special interest legislation there will > >> be no free market. Libertarian ideas are just that, ideas. Not > >> pragmatic. Perfection that gets in the way of the doable. Escapism, > >> imo. They do need to be heard,though, but not treated as a realistic > >> possibility, imo. > > > > Like any ideals, they are goals to strive for. > > May I ask why, since you yourself concede that free markets are > impossible? You will never be a success in life so you might as well terminate it now.
From: Carbon on 21 Oct 2009 18:14 On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:57:16 +0000, assimilate wrote: > On 19-Oct-2009, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>> I believe you are in error here. First of all, there has been very >>> little de-regulation in the banking industry; it is still the most >>> regulated industry in the US >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act > > Glass-Steagall is the scapegoat that the pols hide behind hoping no > one will notice what they've done. You claimed there was very little deregulation in the banking industry. This is wrong. Repealing Glass_Steagall in 1999 did indeed deregulate the banking industry, enabling the financial shenanigans that led to the recent banking crisis.
From: Carbon on 21 Oct 2009 18:18 On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:54:02 +0000, assimilate wrote: > On 20-Oct-2009, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>>> When you have lobbyists and special interest legislation there will >>>> be no free market. Libertarian ideas are just that, ideas. Not >>>> pragmatic. Perfection that gets in the way of the doable. >>>> Escapism, imo. They do need to be heard,though, but not treated as >>>> a realistic possibility, imo. >>> >>> Like any ideals, they are goals to strive for. >> >> May I ask why, since you yourself concede that free markets are >> impossible > > Do you not have ideals you strive to acheive, like, I dunno, a single > digit handicap, no matter how impossible? I did strive to be a single digit handicapper--a reasonable goal--which I achieved after some struggle. I did not strive to be 11 feet tall, or to be anything else which was clearly impossible.
From: assimilate on 22 Oct 2009 01:37 On 21-Oct-2009, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > Glass-Steagall is the scapegoat that the pols hide behind hoping no > > one will notice what they've done. > > You claimed there was very little deregulation in the banking industry. > This is wrong. Repealing Glass_Steagall in 1999 did indeed deregulate > the banking industry, enabling the financial shenanigans that led to the > recent banking crisis. what do you know about banking regulation? Calling the repeal of Glass-Steagall deregulation may be technically correct as it removed a small burden from some banks, but substantively it was nothing. -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 22 Oct 2009 01:39
On 21-Oct-2009, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > Like any ideals, they are goals to strive for. > > > > May I ask why, since you yourself concede that free markets are > > impossible? > > You will never be a success in life so you might as well terminate it > now. Exactly -- bill-o |