The Cancer of Regulation

NoDrama said:

So we gave the Big Banks almost 3 times what they originally loaned to us. Something morally reprehensible about that. But it was government deregulation who did this, not the big banks. Don't be mad at the Banks, they did nothing wrong, it was deregulation, perpetrated by republicans probably.

Click to expand...

Of course it was the banks. What enabled the banks to pull that scam that UB was referring to was financial deregulation. It was congress that ended government regulation of credit default swaps. Why pretend like that didn't happen when it clearly did happen?

NoDrama said:

A post about deregulation being the cause for every economic malady known to mankind will be sure to follow.....

Click to expand...

I suppose I'm a spammer for posting about deregulation in a thread about deregulation right?

The problem here is that you aren't picking up on the scam being run on you.

Conservatives tell you that regulations are hurting small businesses. This sounds credible to you because it is absolutely true. So when they propose deregulation as the solution that sounds very reasonable.

What they aren't saying is that the reasons regulations are hurting small businesses is because they keep deregulating big businesses! We had much stronger financial regulations in the 50s-60s and a more level playing field for small businesses. It's a total scam and it only works because the first half of their argument is true which makes the lies they are about to tell more believable.

Conservatives make the correct claim that currently economic regulations are hurting small businesses. Then they say they will support financial deregulation. But when the pass these deregulation laws, they end up deregulating multinational corporations, banks, and wall st.

They are presenting you with a real problem and then a false solution to that problem. You assume that because the problem they are talking about is correct, their solution is correct too. But it's not. You're being conned. All they do is deregulate big business while keeping the regulations for small businesses in tact making the playing field even more unbalanced.

We've had 30 years of financial deregulation and almost all major federal deregulation policies have been entirely for the benefit of big businesses. Hopefully one day you will figure out the scam that's being run on you.

Im not against regualtions(laws) at all, but I am against having regulations unenforced. What the banks did, are doing, will keep doing is called fraud. Fraud is illegal right now this very minute, yet the banks are allowed to fuck us all with impunity. When they get caught red handed the fine is usually less than .1% of the amount scammed.

The actual root of the problem is putting trust in the blood sucking banksters to ever do the right thing. Sometimes I think Greenspan did it on purpose just to create a crash so the system could reboot.
Greenspan was always a Huge Gold bug, even in 1981 he advocated for gold http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921073,00.html?promoid=googlep
Midway through his career, though, Greenspan abruptly pulls a 180 degree philosophical change of conviction to embrace the fiat money, welfare system that he so vehemently despised in earlier writings. Not only did he embrace fiat money, but he used and abused it to a degree which steered us down the path of irreversible self destruction. What came over him? How does such an intelligent and seemingly honest human being become so corrupt as to use and abuse the monetary system of the entire world further enriching the wealthy and abusing the poor? Or should I ask a deeper question… Could he have done it all on purpose?

My business is regulated at both the state and federal level. Much of the regulation is targeted at protecting both the consumer and the workers performing the services. This is reason enough to justify regulation but it also can protect the business- owner from potential litigation when the regulators step in and determine that work done was within compliance guidlines. My only problem is the reluctance of the regulators to enforce the laws already in place. How much warning did the SEC need to examine Mr. Bernie Madoff's records more closely well in advance the nightmare he created? I feel certain that the collapse of AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac etc. could have been averted or, at least mitigated by bureaucrats simply doing their jobs.

Carl Spackler said:

I feel certain that the collapse of AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac etc. could have been averted or, at least mitigated by bureaucrats simply doing their jobs.

Click to expand...

In the case of AIG, it was taken out of government's hands to regulate what they were doing. The problem wasn't that they violated laws, it was that it was legal and unregulated.

Dan Kone said:

Congrats. You found a typo on the internet. Good work.

Click to expand...

I an used too yor "typos". Usualy, I can figur out wat yor tring two say butt this thyme, I coold knot, sew I axed four clrafication. Of yuo want too bee taking seareuslee, bw ackyuret.

Mr Neutron said:

I an used too yor "typos". Usualy, I can figur out wat yor tring two say butt this thyme, I coold knot, sew I axed four clrafication. Of yuo want too bee taking seareuslee, bw ackyuret.

Click to expand...

I typed a t instead of a y. You caught me. You do realize they are right next to each other on the keyboard right? Making multiple posts about me missing one letter on the keyboard doesn't make me look stupid as much as it makes you look petty and bitter.

NoDrama said:

Im not against regualtions(laws) at all, but I am against having regulations unenforced. What the banks did, are doing, will keep doing is called fraud. Fraud is illegal right now this very minute, yet the banks are allowed to fuck us all with impunity. When they get caught red handed the fine is usually less than .1% of the amount scammed.

Click to expand...

How where they supposed to enforce regulations when we deregulated that part of the economy, taking regulatory enforcement out of the government's hands and allowing the banks to regulate themselves?

That's what you're going to get if you support deregulation. You're not going to get some laws that cut red tape for small businesses in order to help them compete with multinationals. You get exactly the opposite. Laws that make it easier for megacorps to scam us.

Even if we had a president who supported deregulation for all businesses, the bill would have to go through congress where all the big corporations and wall st would get to change the bill to give them an advantage. By the time it became law, it will be something that hurts small businesses.

The actual root of the problem is putting trust in the blood sucking banksters to ever do the right thing. Sometimes I think Greenspan did it on purpose just to create a crash so the system could reboot.

Click to expand...

Greenspan isn't some arch villain. He wasn't trying to pull off some evil plot so he could get wealthy. If he wanted to do that, he wouldn't have stayed in government so long, he would have returned to the private sector after a few years. He wanted the economy to be successful because that would make his legacy look good. Unfortunately he was massively wrong.

Half the problem is that people support deregulation. They don't specify what type of deregulation they support. They just propose deregulation as a solution. When people do that, this is the result. Cutting the red tape not for small businesses, but cutting the red tape that stops wall st from scamming us.

dan kone said:

i typed a t instead of a y. You caught me. You do realize they are right next to each other on the keyboard right? Making multiple posts about me missing one letter on the keyboard doesn't make me look stupid as much as it makes you look petty and bitter.

Click to expand...

"rotflmao"