Discussion in 'Politics' started by Mr. Shaman, Sep 14, 2010.
I guess Wall $treet hadn't GORGED itself (enough), from 2000 thru 2008.
The market wasn't regulating itself from 2000 to 2008.
Gee.....ya' heard-about-that, did ya'?
Sure More of the same seems to be the only acceptable soloution to our problems.
The market hasn't regulated itself since the 19th Century, Mr Shitbag. The issues come precisely from regulation, not the lack of it. The mortgage business is among the most highly regulated. Securities are among the most highly regulated. Have been since the 1930s.
Remember Sarbanes-Oxley? It was supposed to stop fraud after Enron etc. How did that one work out for you? Instead it imposed high costs and drove lots of IPOs overseas. It probably failed to prevent a single instance of fraud.
Any further regulation will do the same. Until the gov't can outlaw stupidity (in which case you'll be in a world of hurt) excesses and bad decisions will always be around.
Talking points amuse me. There were more regulations enacted during Bush's tenure than at anytime since Nixon.
And likely less money spent on regulation enforcement during Bush's Reign.
Between fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2009, outlays on regulatory activities, adjusted for inflation, increased from $26.4 billion to an estimated $42.7 billion, or 62 percent. By contrast, President Clinton increased real spending on regulatory activities by 31 percent, from $20.1 billion in 1993 to $26.4 billion in 2001.
Bush's Regulatory Kiss-Off - Reason Magazine
Contributing Editor Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University
Ahh I guess Patriot act fell under regulations?
can't you find a communist to order you necessities from. that should make you feel better.
Separate names with a comma.