Hate Obama? Why?

  • #476
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
Continuing off topic:

Why does everyone seem to think that this is a dichotomy? Regulation or no regulation? It was (somewhat) regulated with poorly considered regulations before, what is required now is not a complete absence of regulation, or total government control, but simply better thought out regulations. The choice is not between regulation and no regulation, but between bad regulation (what was) and good regulation (hopefully what will be).
This goes all the way back to Reagan and the notion that markets will act rationally and in their own best interest. We now know this is not true. Markets are driven by short-term gains, and chaos. So it is not a question of regulation or no regulation, it comes down to the essence of markets and how they operate. For example, today, no one in their right mind can argue that AIG was acting rationally, responsibly, or in their own interest. No one can argue that banks betting on an infinite housing bubble were rational. And no one can argue that we have free markets when we have companies that are too big to fail; that can take down the national and global economies.

Taleb argues that we don't even have a model for the emerging global economy; that the old rules don't apply anymore.
 
Last edited:
  • #477
2,985
15
Government "regulation" of people's behavior is by definition anti-liberty, so the burden should be on the people advocating the regulation, not the people advocating liberty, to justify it.
I have no idea what that means. Anti-Liberty? That sounds like a bunch of PC mumbo jumbo. (But I agree with your general sentiments).

As far as "good regulations", show me one that protects individual liberty instead of restricting it, and I'll be all for it.
Again, what is "individual liberty". This is a bogus statement. By definiton, a regulation would restrict liberty. What's your point?
 
Last edited:
  • #478
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
I have no idea what that means. Anti-Liberty? That sounds like a bunch of PC mumbo jumbo.



Again, what is "individual liberty". This is a bogus statement.
We have a right to be protected from people like the crooks at AIG who would destroy the world for their private gain.

Profits are privatized; risk is socialized. Where is the liberty in that?
 
  • #479
2,985
15
We have a right to be protected from people like the crooks at AIG who would destroy the world for their private gain.
What right do you have? You, and I, have no such rights.

The only thing you and I have is the ability to hold them accountable for breaking laws. The End. That's not a "right" you have.

Correction: You and I don't even have that ability. The government does.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Right
 
  • #480
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
What right do you have? You, and I, have no such rights.

The only thing you and I have is the ability to hold them accountable for breaking laws. The End. That's not a "right" you have.

Correction: You and I don't even have that ability. The government does.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Right
False. We also have the right to make laws. That's why we have representitives. Are you forgetting that Congress represents us?

What's more, when a single company can threaten the entire economy, it becomes a matter of national security. If things were to continue to spiral downward, we may be lucky if this doesn't result in WWIII. Times like these can easily lead to protectionism, and war.

Bernachy was most alarmed because he is an expert on the Great Depression. We were falling into what could have been an "unrecoverable spiral" that would lead to the greatest depression of all.
 
Last edited:
  • #481
2,985
15
False. We also have the right to make laws. That's why we have representitives.
Heheh, False. YOU dont have the right to make laws. The congress makes laws. They have to vote on it. Which means YOU, and ME, and that guy you don't like down the street, have to majority support it.

PS: I listen to CSPAN radio every day. The congress is a bunch of IDIOTS. My god they are dumb. Not only are they stupid, they give HORRIBLE HORRIBLE speeches.

I'll never forget one bozo congressman who said "AND THIS BILL WILL SEPARATE THE MEN FROM THE BOYS AND THE GIRLS FROM THE WOMEN"

What a clown. There fools.

They like to hear themselves talk and get money under the table.

Then there's that 1100 page bill no one read and passed. Good greif. What do they do all day - anything?
 
Last edited:
  • #482
Al68
Profits are privatized
What does that mean?

Using the word "privatized" implies that you're referring to something that isn't already private. Are you referring to a public or government entity's profits?
 
  • #483
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
Heheh, False. YOU dont have the right to make laws. The congress makes laws. They have to vote on it. Which means YOU, and ME, and that guy you don't like down the street, have to majority support it.
Actually, have you ever heard of a petition and a vote; such as proposition 8 in California? But beyond that, ultimately Congress does answer to the people.

You know that I didn't mean that we pass Federal laws directly as citizens. :rolleyes:
 
  • #484
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
What does that mean?

Using the word "privatized" implies that you're referring to something that isn't already private. Are you referring to a public or government entity's profits?
I mean this:

Who made all of the money? A relatively small group of individuals.

Who is now paying for it? All of us. The risk did not reside solely with the individuals who profited; and to the greatest extent, those who engineered this disaster made the most money of all! The bonuses were the ultimate slap in the face in this regard.

As soon as we had companies that were "too big to fail", the free market ceased to exist.
 
Last edited:
  • #485
2,985
15
Actually, have you ever heard of a petition and a vote; such as proposition 8 in California? But beyond that, ultimately Congress does answer to the people.

You know that I didn't mean that we pass Federal laws directly as citizens. :rolleyes:
Please, listen to CSPAN radio for a week if you can stomach it. The congress is full of clowns. I don't mean that lightly either. They really are a bunch of stupid folks. They use catch phrases all day long. They love to use them to the point of absurdity. And they use stupid folksy analogies. So if the crisis is like a guy going to his car and the car is full of gunpowder ready to explode, why would he have a stick of dyno-mite in his pocket?

Well, its more like he was driving an ox-cart and the wheel was loose but he decided to go fast into the pot hole.

Well, if the road has pot holes why is he driving the car!?!?

.......well you see, its like the car is out of gas but keeps rolling.

<Head Explodes>

Im not making this up. They REALLY do BS like this all day long.

Oh yeah, and the love to "reach across the isle". I guess they high five eachother when they reach across. No wait, they're just exchanging money.
 
Last edited:
  • #486
Al68
I mean this:

Who made all of the money? A relatively small group of individuals.

Who is now paying for it? All of us. The risk did not reside solely with the individuals who profited; and to the greatest extent, those who engineered this disaster made the most money of all! The bonuses were the ultimate slap in the face in this regard.

As soon as we had companies that were "too big to fail", the free market ceased to exist.
I was asking what the phrase "profits are privatized" means. The word "privatize" is a verb. It means to make something private which previously was not. So you must be referring to the profits of some government entity. Which one?

And those that engineered this problem are still in congress, now with even more power than before.
 
  • #487
mheslep
Gold Member
311
728
This goes all the way back to Reagan and the notion that markets will act rationally and in their own best interest. We now know this is not true. Markets are driven by short-term gains, and chaos. So it is not a question of regulation or no regulation, it comes down to the essence of markets and how they operate. For example, today, no one in their right mind can argue that AIG was acting rationally, responsibly, or in their own interest. No one can argue that banks betting on an infinite housing bubble were rational. And no one can argue that we have free markets when we have companies that are too big to fail; that can take down the national and global economies....
Government is driven by short-term political gains, and chaos. For example, today, no one in their right mind can argue that the Congress was acting rationally, responsibly. And so on.
 
  • #488
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
Government is driven by short-term political gains, and chaos. For example, today, no one in their right mind can argue that the Congress was acting rationally, responsibly. And so on.
We elect political leaders who can be removed by the will of the people. We don't elect CEOs.

Are you arguing that since free-market theory has failed catastrophically - since the Republicans have have nearly destroyed the country through their blind ideology - we should revoke the Constitution?

Democracy is messy. Even the founding fathers knew that. But free-market theory has failed essentially - fundamentally.
 
Last edited:
  • #489
mheslep
Gold Member
311
728
We elect political leaders who can be removed by the will of the people. We don't elect CEOs.

Are you arguing that since free-market theory has failed catastrophically - since the Republicans have have nearly destroyed the country through their blind ideology - we should revoke the Constitution?

Democracy is messy. Even the founding fathers knew that. But free-market theory has failed essentially - fundamentally.
I was making a point about making wild, completely unsubstantiated statements by doing a simple word swap. The point didn't get through.
 
  • #490
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301
A man-on-the-street TEA Party protestor interviewed by CNN today. [11:10 AM PDT] The man was carrying a picture of Obama made to look like Hitler.

Obama is a fascist!
Why?
Because he is!
Why?
Because we need term limits!
What does that have to do with being a fascist? Why is Obama a fascist?
Because he is!

Okay, moving on now...
Thank God these people are out of power. You don't suppose he watches Fox News...?
 
Last edited:

Related Threads on Hate Obama? Why?

Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
160
Views
17K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
141
Views
20K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Last Post
5
Replies
115
Views
13K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
57
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
21
Views
2K
Top