For all of you so called “liberals” out there.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk][quote]To be a “liberal” today you have to have a big governement.[/quote]

I’ll agree, since it’s hard to debate a statement that is so profound.

And there is so much historical evidence in your favor as well. I mean, there was never any concentration of power, corruption, or insider trading back in the good ol’ days of small government.

BTW, It’s supposed to get a bit chilly later this week. I’m off to the Standard Oil shop to buy some kerosene…[/quote]

Pri: Make sure you use your company store scrip!

[CA renter]

It seems to me that **corruption** is the problem, not the size of the government.

You can have corruption under a dictatorship(as small as government can be, no?), too.

The problem isn’t size, but accountability. As it stands, politicians are being controlled by corporate/financial interests; they are not accountable to citizens and society, in general. THAT is what needs to change.

Personally, I think it’s important to limit the revolving door between private and public office, and to get very tough on corruption. Though I see both sides, severely limiting lobbying would be a good start, especially when that lobbying includes some kind of exchange of money, power, etc. It would help a lot of we banned politicians from going into lobbying, and vice-versa. That is where a lot of our problems lie, IMHO.

[aldante]

Hey CA Renter,
The smaller the government the easier it is to see who is being corrupted. The larger the harder. So we agree that accountability is the issue. I also agree with your solution because I think that if the revovling door was shut down the size of our government would subside. The lawmakers are employeed to make laws. Everyone agrees that K street writes the laws. So if there are less people on K street there would be less laws.
I think that our country is in trouble becasue it is a welfare state, and no one is more on welfare then our large corporations.
I simply disagree that a larger government is better. The waste is astounding and the regulations (becasue regulators want to make regulations) impeed freedom. A normal, honest hard working individual needs much more capital to start their own business today becasue of regulation.

[aldante]

And there is so much historical evidence in your favor as well. I mean, there was never any concentration of power, corruption, or insider trading back in the good ol’ days of small government.

BTW, It’s supposed to get a bit chilly later this week. I’m off to the Standard Oil shop to buy some kerosene…[/quote]

Wow spoken like a true sage. That is the same logic that first graders use when they hit their buddy…”he did it first”. But you have made my point once again. The bigger the government the bigger the corruption. TBTF is our new moniker.

I am not argueing that corruption does not take place, it always has through history. But how many of these a-holes are in jail, or better still really paid for their crimes? None. By making silly arguements just to be right we are perpetuating a broken system. At least get the casues and conditions right. The banks never could have reached their current size in a true free market. But the FRN that is in your wallet is supposedly legal tender while silver and gold are not? You talk about regulation and big government and the Federal Reserve System has a monopoly on every single paper or digital dollar. And if you compete with them you get thrown in jail for haveing the gall to use metal as a means of exchange. That is called being FORCED into submission. That is the system that you want to back. You want men and women to be forced to “give”, while rich elites with conncections to the FED are taking millions! No thanks.

[zk]

[quote=aldante]
Now you want the same government that allowed Madoff to happen (that was breaucrates not Republicans or Democrates agreed?) regulate the private rating agencies?
[/quote]

No, I don’t want the same government to regulate the private ratings agencies. I want a more proactive government to regulate those agencies. That should be obvious. You’re making my point for me. The government has been failing to regulate finance and needs to do more of it and a better job of it.

[quote=aldante]
Remember 2008 when the “smartest The free enterprise system does not guarentee anything. That is the difference. Yet the Government will guarentee the loans on toxic loans with our tax payer money? Get a grip.
[/quote]

That’s gibberish. Try it in English. Then I’ll respond.

[quote=aldante]

As to the efficency of the Government takeovers- if there were not enough examples already, how is GM working out for you?

[/quote]

When did we start talking about the efficiency of government takeovers? This is the kind of bullshit that logic-challenged right wingers constantly resort to. Pay attention.

[quote=aldante]
Sorry, big government makes big mistakes. The only reason trillions of dollars have been wasted is becasue the government is involved. Republican or Democrat.[/quote]

The reason trillions of dollars have been wasted is corruption and underregulation.

[swave]

[quote=aldante]
When you get a small group of regulators who control virtually unlimited resources the corruption is much greater and much more harmful. Look at Madoff. $60 billion ripped off – all the while a citizen was pointing his finger but the SEC turned their head.
[/quote]
The SEC should have stopped it much sooner. But, do you really think Madoff would have stopped sooner without the SEC?

[all]

[quote=CA renter]
You can have corruption under a dictatorship (as small as government can be, no?), too.[/quote]
Not very good example. Dictatorships generally require a lot of control, which usually requires large government.

[svelte]

[quote=aldante]To be a “liberal” today you have to have a big governement….In the face of all this evidence that POWER CORRUPTS how anyone can claim that a big government is necessary is IDIOTIC…..IMHO.[/quote]

Wow.

To be idiotic today, you have to make assumptions about people you’ve never even met. IMHO.

[bubba99]

While we are discussing Big vs. small, the same government is trying to remove the protections of the constitution. First the patriot act, and now the coup de gras – a bill to allow the US military to arrest without warrant, and hold without charges US citizens here in the United States.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being

If you believe that big government corrupts, wait till the bureaucrats get this power

[briansd1]

[quote=bubba99] First the patriot act, and now the coup de gras – a bill to allow the US military to arrest without warrant, and hold without charges US citizens here in the United States.

[/quote]

A coup de gras is very American indeed. We are getting morbidly obese in this country. That will kill us for sure!

[paramount]

Too much government, too little justice.

[aldante]

swave
You may not know that Madoff was in the “in” crowd at the sec. Because he was in charge of the NASD.
Here is the problem with your breaucracy:
Since 1991, Madoff and his wife have contributed about $240,000 to federal candidates, parties and committees, including $25,000 a year from 2005 through 2008 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. The Committee has returned $100,000 of the Madoffs’ contributions to Irving Picard, the bankruptcy trustee who oversees all claims. Senator Charles E. Schumer returned almost $30,000 received from Madoff and his relatives to the trustee, and Senator Christopher J. Dodd donated $1,500 to the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, a Madoff victim.[45]

The Madoff family gained access to Washington’s lawmakers and regulators through the industry’s top trade group. The Madoff family has long-standing, high-level ties to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), the primary securities industry organization.[46] Bernard Madoff sat on the Board of Directors of the Securities Industry Association, which merged with the Bond Market Association in 2006 to form SIFMA.[47]

Madoff’s brother Peter then served two terms as a member of SIFMA’s Board of Directors. He stepped down from the Board of Directors of SIFMA in December 2008, as news of the Ponzi scheme broke.[46] From 2000 to 2008 the two Madoff brothers gave $56,000 to SIFMA, and tens of thousands of dollars more to sponsor SIFMA industry meetings.[48] Bernard Madoff’s niece Shana Madoff was active on the Executive Committee of SIFMA’s Compliance & Legal Division, but resigned her SIFMA position shortly after her uncle’s arrest.[49]

Its called access dude and we do not have it. Do you have any idea how he fooled people? He printed up his own statements!!! Wow very sophisticated.

A citizen (competitor) figured it out with no access. His name was Harry Markopolus and and he was ridiculed and put off by your regulators. Markopolus went to the SEC multiple times. You want to protect the part of this story that failed? IF YOU BLESSED REGULATORS COULLD NOT FIND THE GREATEST PONZI SCHEME EVER what exactly can they do? Why are you placing your faith and my tax dollars with them??? Please respond I gots to know bro.

My theory: the SEC was 1. Terribly and horribly ineffective or 2. Conflicted because Madoff knew too many of their bosses.

[aldante]

Svelte,
Very cute but I did not call anyone idiotic. I think it is possible for completely smart,rational, and virtuous people to do or say idiotic things…..

[aldante]

ZK,
Where do the trillions of dollars come from?

[zk]

[quote=aldante]ZK,
Where do the trillions of dollars come from?[/quote]

We all know where the trillions of dollars came from. The question is where did they go. And a lot of them were spent where they wouldn’t have to have been had there been effective regulation. I don’t understand your response to swave. Your theory that the SEC was terribly and horribly ineffective is, in my opinion, correct. So you want to downsize it? How is that going to help?

[Author]

Posts