 |
|
|
|||||
| « Previous thread | Next thread » |
On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:02:17 -0500, John Galt <k...@g...com>
wrote:
>If you think (rightly or wrongly, it's irrelevant) that something needs
>to be regulated, have the COJONES to legislate it. The only reason to
>push companies to "voluntary reg" is fear.
The article noted it was dodge asked for by the banks to escape
regulation in the EU. So it was intended as a fig leaf to help them.
Just another case of a Bush fox in charge of the chicken coup.
Lawyerkill wrote:
> On Sep 27, 11:23?pm, d...@g...com wrote:
>> On Sep 27, 6:13?pm, John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Put us under a trusteeship?
>>>> Economically that's just about what Bush and Paulson are doing. China
>>>> as the principal creditor will pick the trustee.
>>> Bingo.
>> I can see the argument, except I'm talking about a lot more than just
>> an economic reset.
>>
>> I'm talking that we have so fucked things up that we have forfeited
>> our right to remain a free nation and govern ourselves. ?Without
>> immediate international political intervention, World War 3 is
>> inevitable and almost certain to start when one broke state looks at
>> another and starts shooting...
>>
>> Mike
>
> Is this Theodore Kaczynski?
When the end comes, I'm buying all my survival gear from darkstar.
JG
r...@c...net wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:02:17 -0500, John Galt <k...@g...com>
> wrote:
>
>> If you think (rightly or wrongly, it's irrelevant) that something needs
>> to be regulated, have the COJONES to legislate it. The only reason to
>> push companies to "voluntary reg" is fear.
>
>
> The article noted it was dodge asked for by the banks to escape
> regulation in the EU. So it was intended as a fig leaf to help them.
> Just another case of a Bush fox in charge of the chicken coup.
There you go again. What are you going to do when you don't have Bush to
blame anymore for these bipartisan politician behaviors?
JG
On Sep 27, 9:06 pm, F...@a...com wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:52:01 -0700 (PDT), V...@t...net wrote:
> >On Sep 27, 6:43 pm, h...@l...com wrote:
> >> America needs a total rebuild. Send Uncle Suckemoff to the showers!
>
> >> mitch
>
> > this huge free market failure pretty much puts a stake into
> >the heart of the libertarian ayn rand/friedmanism. you know, markets
> >are self regulating, self correcting, self policing, all information
> >is perfect, all players in the market are rational, business's would
> >never harm their customers, trickle down, etc. what a load of b.s.
> > its to late to dig them up, try and hang them, but we can go after
> >their disciples.
>
> Well, you would be right, BUT since this was not a "free market
> failure" everything you wrote is useless. This crisis was brought
> about by OVER REGULATION, not "no regulation".
only rip van winkle, or a complete crank would write the above.
either you have been in a coma for the last 3 decades, or you are
missing some screws.
On Sep 27, 8:26 pm, Lawyerkill <L...@a...com> wrote:
> Is this Theodore Kaczynski?
No.
Mike (But a lot of people might not see much difference if there's
simply nothing to lose and they don't immediately shoot me at that
point...)
"Lawyerkill" <L...@a...com> wrote in message
news:42bd4368-f945-456f-b5fa-dcef524c3b16@r66g2000hs
g.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 27, 11:23?pm, d...@g...com wrote:
> On Sep 27, 6:13?pm, John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote:
>
> > > Put us under a trusteeship?
>
> > > Economically that's just about what Bush and Paulson are doing.
> > > China
> > > as the principal creditor will pick the trustee.
>
> > Bingo.
>
> I can see the argument, except I'm talking about a lot more than
> just
> an economic reset.
>
> I'm talking that we have so fucked things up that we have forfeited
> our right to remain a free nation and govern ourselves. ?Without
> immediate international political intervention, World War 3 is
> inevitable and almost certain to start when one broke state looks at
> another and starts shooting...
>
> Mike
Is this Theodore Kaczynski?
===============
LOL! He is definitely workin' on it. I give him another year or so
and he will be there.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:46:04 -0700, r...@c...net wrote:
>>Well, you would be right, BUT since this was not a "free market
>>failure" everything you wrote is useless. This crisis was brought
>>about by OVER REGULATION, not "no regulation".
>
>
>Ah the last of the kool aid drinking zombies stumbles forth.
>
>
>Just one example form 1000s available to let you know just how stupid
>you're being:
>http://www.nytimes.com
Ah, the "reichwing" NY Times. HA HA HA HA HA HA
Try this one on for size.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o
On Sep 27, 8:38 pm, John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote:
> When the end comes, I'm buying all my survival gear from darkstar.
Survivalblog.com -- learn it, live it, love it.
Mike
On Sep 27, 10:02 pm, John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote:
> r...@c...net wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 21:06:22 -0500, F...@a...com wrote:
>
> >> Well, you would be right, BUT since this was not a "free market
> >> failure" everything you wrote is useless. This crisis was brought
> >> about by OVER REGULATION, not "no regulation".
>
> > Ah the last of the kool aid drinking zombies stumbles forth.
>
> > Just one example form 1000s available to let you know just how stupid
> > you're being:
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/business/27sec.ht
ml?scp=1&sq=sec%20...
>
> > "The last six months have made it abundantly clear that voluntary
> > regulation does not work," he said in a statement. The program "was
> > fundamentally flawed from the beginning, because investment banks
> > could opt in or out of supervision voluntarily. The fact that
> > investment bank holding companies could withdraw from this voluntary
> > supervision at their discretion diminished the perceived mandate" of
> > the program, and "weakened its effectiveness," he added.
>
> You know my opinion about regulation.
>
> That said, "voluntary regulation" be it on Hollywood (I think they're
> still on some sort of vol reg thing vis a vis violence issues) or Wall
> Street, is simply the most egregious example of cowardly government I
> can think of.
>
> If you think (rightly or wrongly, it's irrelevant) that something needs
> to be regulated, have the COJONES to legislate it. The only reason to
> push companies to "voluntary reg" is fear.
>
> JG
or a crank ideology that has run its course after destroying the
worlds economy. you know, markets self regulate, markets self correct,
markets self police, business's would never harm their customers.
where have we heard that bit o crank dogma before?
cox believes it, greenspan believes it, cato, american enterprise,
the hoover inst., the free market inst. the fraser inst., the chicago
school of economics, should i go on, there are many many others,
alive, and dead.
On Sep 27, 10:40 pm, John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote:
> r...@c...net wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:02:17 -0500, John Galt <k...@g...com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> If you think (rightly or wrongly, it's irrelevant) that something needs
> >> to be regulated, have the COJONES to legislate it. The only reason to
> >> push companies to "voluntary reg" is fear.
>
> > The article noted it was dodge asked for by the banks to escape
> > regulation in the EU. So it was intended as a fig leaf to help them.
> > Just another case of a Bush fox in charge of the chicken coup.
>
> There you go again. What are you going to do when you don't have Bush to
> blame anymore for these bipartisan politician behaviors?
>
> JG
good god galt, again, some agreement. although, the republican party
is full of cranks, the democrats have a branch of them.
| « Previous thread | Next thread » |
Wimp Dems have votes to pass bailout but want GOP on board.
Where to Find Bid Ask Spreads for Pink Sheet Stocks?
*** $5,751.50 - $10,000+ per Month Trading Penny Stocks..REALLY!!! ***
Mike Pence (R-IN)--anatomy of a republican financial idiot
Up