The boat turns slowly

[aldante]

Here, Here!

See Frederic Bastiat on the proper role of the law:

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html#SECTION_G699

[briansd1]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=gandalf]Now, how do we get all the bankers in the world to do the right thing?[/quote]

By letting them fail when they do the wrong thing.

ALso, by forcing them to play with their own money instead of ours.

As someone said above, the issue is the fact that the banks are playing with our money.[/quote]

That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.

We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.

Those same bankers are still in charge.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=gandalf]Now, how do we get all the bankers in the world to do the right thing?[/quote]

By letting them fail when they do the wrong thing.

ALso, by forcing them to play with their own money instead of ours.

As someone said above, the issue is the fact that the banks are playing with our money.[/quote]

That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.

We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.

Those same bankers are still in charge.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=gandalf]Now, how do we get all the bankers in the world to do the right thing?[/quote]

By letting them fail when they do the wrong thing.

ALso, by forcing them to play with their own money instead of ours.

As someone said above, the issue is the fact that the banks are playing with our money.[/quote]

That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.

We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.

Those same bankers are still in charge.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=gandalf]Now, how do we get all the bankers in the world to do the right thing?[/quote]

By letting them fail when they do the wrong thing.

ALso, by forcing them to play with their own money instead of ours.

As someone said above, the issue is the fact that the banks are playing with our money.[/quote]

That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.

We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.

Those same bankers are still in charge.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=gandalf]Now, how do we get all the bankers in the world to do the right thing?[/quote]

By letting them fail when they do the wrong thing.

ALso, by forcing them to play with their own money instead of ours.

As someone said above, the issue is the fact that the banks are playing with our money.[/quote]

That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.

We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.

Those same bankers are still in charge.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.[/quote]

Perhaps. If “we” means “Congress.” Congress has too many friends in the banks to do this.

[quote=briansd1]We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.[/quote]

Don’t really agree with this. If they did it under the guise of the market system, it was a poor diguise. It was socialism at its worst – socializing the loss of private companies who would have otherwise made private profits.

They did it under the guise of saving us from an economic system collapse, which really meant bankers would go away, which is exactly what we needed.

Again, this pseudo-nationalization/socialization of banks is one giant form of regulation. Not the kind of regulation that is needed.

[quote=briansd1]Those same bankers are still in charge.[/quote]

Yep.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.[/quote]

Perhaps. If “we” means “Congress.” Congress has too many friends in the banks to do this.

[quote=briansd1]We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.[/quote]

Don’t really agree with this. If they did it under the guise of the market system, it was a poor diguise. It was socialism at its worst – socializing the loss of private companies who would have otherwise made private profits.

They did it under the guise of saving us from an economic system collapse, which really meant bankers would go away, which is exactly what we needed.

Again, this pseudo-nationalization/socialization of banks is one giant form of regulation. Not the kind of regulation that is needed.

[quote=briansd1]Those same bankers are still in charge.[/quote]

Yep.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.[/quote]

Perhaps. If “we” means “Congress.” Congress has too many friends in the banks to do this.

[quote=briansd1]We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.[/quote]

Don’t really agree with this. If they did it under the guise of the market system, it was a poor diguise. It was socialism at its worst – socializing the loss of private companies who would have otherwise made private profits.

They did it under the guise of saving us from an economic system collapse, which really meant bankers would go away, which is exactly what we needed.

Again, this pseudo-nationalization/socialization of banks is one giant form of regulation. Not the kind of regulation that is needed.

[quote=briansd1]Those same bankers are still in charge.[/quote]

Yep.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.[/quote]

Perhaps. If “we” means “Congress.” Congress has too many friends in the banks to do this.

[quote=briansd1]We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.[/quote]

Don’t really agree with this. If they did it under the guise of the market system, it was a poor diguise. It was socialism at its worst – socializing the loss of private companies who would have otherwise made private profits.

They did it under the guise of saving us from an economic system collapse, which really meant bankers would go away, which is exactly what we needed.

Again, this pseudo-nationalization/socialization of banks is one giant form of regulation. Not the kind of regulation that is needed.

[quote=briansd1]Those same bankers are still in charge.[/quote]

Yep.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]That’s because we don’t have the guts to outright nationalize the banks and throw the bankers out.[/quote]

Perhaps. If “we” means “Congress.” Congress has too many friends in the banks to do this.

[quote=briansd1]We have effectively nationalized the banks already. But we did it under the guise of a “market system” because of ideological reasons.[/quote]

Don’t really agree with this. If they did it under the guise of the market system, it was a poor diguise. It was socialism at its worst – socializing the loss of private companies who would have otherwise made private profits.

They did it under the guise of saving us from an economic system collapse, which really meant bankers would go away, which is exactly what we needed.

Again, this pseudo-nationalization/socialization of banks is one giant form of regulation. Not the kind of regulation that is needed.

[quote=briansd1]Those same bankers are still in charge.[/quote]

Yep.

[CA renter]

Great response to the article, DWCAP.

There is no reason to buy now. Prices are still insanely high for desirable properties.

That is a fluff piece for the REIC. Let them come back to us in four years so they can understand why we’re still sitting on the fence.

[CA renter]

Great response to the article, DWCAP.

There is no reason to buy now. Prices are still insanely high for desirable properties.

That is a fluff piece for the REIC. Let them come back to us in four years so they can understand why we’re still sitting on the fence.

[CA renter]

Great response to the article, DWCAP.

There is no reason to buy now. Prices are still insanely high for desirable properties.

That is a fluff piece for the REIC. Let them come back to us in four years so they can understand why we’re still sitting on the fence.

[CA renter]

Great response to the article, DWCAP.

There is no reason to buy now. Prices are still insanely high for desirable properties.

That is a fluff piece for the REIC. Let them come back to us in four years so they can understand why we’re still sitting on the fence.

[Author]

Posts