Republicans Admit Free Market Does Not Work

[Toro]

For years, the Republican Party has preached the virtues of the "ownership society." Americans should own their own homes, goes the songbook; they should own stocks; they should take ownership of social benefits like heath care; they should approach their lives as if they are in charge rather than look for dependency-inducing welfare programs.

It's a compelling vision—and it has completely collapsed. The only important ownership that the Bush administration is peddling today is government ownership of the country's financial institutions. On Friday, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson—the former CEO of Goldman Sachs—announced an unprecedented plan to salvage the largest banks in America. Just days after declaring that a bailout of Lehman Brothers would constitute an unacceptable moral hazard, a Republican administration has decided that the only way to keep the American economy alive is to have the federal government take the reins of some of the largest financial institutions in the world.

There is a term in political philosophy to describe a government takeover of a critical industry: That term is socialism. The government is telling us that capital and credit markets cannot, for several reasons, solve the current crisis on their own—only the federal government and its massive taxpayer base have the authority and the resources to solve it. That is state socialism: the philosophy preached by the founders of the Second International, by the radical wing of the American labor movement, through the formation of the Soviet Union and its satellites, and now by Henry Paulson.
...

Henry Paulson, Socialist | The Big Money

 

[Mad Scientist]

More like, "Government telling Banks who to loan to" doesn't work.

 

[Diuretic]

More like, "Government telling Banks who to loan to" doesn't work.

Nope, more to it than that. This is a systemic failure, systemic. The real ugliness is coming out now. Check out the pay and bonuses these Wall Street types gave themselves. For what?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Nope, more to it than that. This is a systemic failure, systemic. The real ugliness is coming out now. Check out the pay and bonuses these Wall Street types gave themselves. For what?

Yup has nothing to do with the Democrats creating the ability of the Lending and banking system to make loans to people that did not qualify and could not pay back those loans. You guys amaze me with your heads in the sand. Not only did the dems create the ability they forced the institutions to do so with more regulations.

The socialists are the ones that created this mess by insisting people that could neither qualify or afford loans should get them.

 

[editec]

I think the whole problem with this debate is the word "free"

We associate "free" with something good, so damned near anything associated with the word resonates with us as being inherently good, too.

Free market suggests that people can do whatever they want, and surely that is a good thing.

But is it really, free?

If I am offering stocks for purchase am I free to lie to people about the books?

No?

Then is it truly a FREE market?

No, of course not.

We limit our freedom in the market place to lie about things like that.

Now is that regulation which limits all our freedom about lying to the market a bad thing?

I think most of us think it is not.

So do we really have a free market?

Well...not exactly.

We would not really want a FREE Market, because we collectively have decided tht we want our government to regulate that market such that it is a FAIR market, don't we?

And don't even get me started on how misleading the phrases "It's a FREE county" or "We are living in the FREE world" both really are.

You want to live in truly free country, try Somalia.

As citizens of a civil society we limit individual freedoms because, while the loss of our individual freedom can be most annoying, having to live with others who have total freedom would be simply awful.

We agree NOT to have total freedom because freedom isn't necessarily ALWAYS a good thing.

In issues of freedom, as with so many other things, the devil really is in the details.

 

[Diuretic]

Yup has nothing to do with the Democrats creating the ability of the Lending and banking system to make loans to people that did not qualify and could not pay back those loans. You guys amaze me with your heads in the sand. Not only did the dems create the ability they forced the institutions to do so with more regulations.

The socialists are the ones that created this mess by insisting people that could neither qualify or afford loans should get them.

Rock, read the stories about how the investment bankers ripped money out of the business and stuffed it into their pockets. The amounts are stunning.

Try, just for a moment, to look past the alibi and look at what actually happened. Now the FBI are in on it they might - just might ("Famous But Incompetent" is how an ex cop friend of mine in the States views them) - find out who's been knocking off all the money.

The more I read and hear of what has been happening the more I'm convinced that perhaps even this huge bailout isn't going to work.

Unless there's a wholesale, radical and huge revision of your financial system, this will happen again. And again the thieves will be looking to you, the taxpayer, to bail them out.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Rock, read the stories about how the investment bankers ripped money out of the business and stuffed it into their pockets. The amounts are stunning.

Try, just for a moment, to look past the alibi and look at what actually happened. Now the FBI are in on it they might - just might ("Famous But Incompetent" is how an ex cop friend of mine in the States views them) - find out who's been knocking off all the money.

The more I read and hear of what has been happening the more I'm convinced that perhaps even this huge bailout isn't going to work.

Unless there's a wholesale, radical and huge revision of your financial system, this will happen again. And again the thieves will be looking to you, the taxpayer, to bail them out.

And we should depend on the same people that created the situation to fix it? Right now the dems are busy trying to create an even bigger problem by excusing and saving all the people that never should have gotten the loans in the first place. Yup great plan that.

We have companies and Corporations going tits up and you and the dems think it is a good idea to RAISE taxes and create windfall profit rip offs to drive even more companies bankrupt.

 

[Diuretic]

Mate, you're knackered. You've got an occupation of Iraq to pay for and this. Something has to give.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Mate, you're knackered. You've got an occupation of Iraq to pay for and this. Something has to give.

I tell ya what? You worry about Kangaroos and we will worry about our supposed "occupation".

 

[Diuretic]

I tell ya what? You worry about Kangaroos and we will worry about our supposed "occupation".

Ya got me there Rock, I am pissing myself laughing, I'll just make sure the roos aren't kicking down the shithouse at the back

But wait.....if there's a pig out there I'm staying home

Hog hostage drama set to end - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[Bern80]

Henry Paulson, Socialist | The Big Money

That may be the most disingenuousm, mis-leading title I've read in a while. It's an Op-Ed piece first off. I guess it's suppossed to tongue in cheek or something, that by the act of government grabbing these institutions Republicans (who are obviously the only people to blame, no one else could possibly be, of course) are becoming socialists and 'admitting' the free market doesn't work? Shit like this, well...shit, doesn't help you build much of a case.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That may be the most disingenuousm, mis-leading title I've read in a while. It's an Op-Ed piece first off. I guess it's suppossed to tongue in cheek or something, that by the act of government grabbing these institutions Republicans (who are obviously the only people to blame, no one else could possibly be, of course) are becoming socialists and 'admitting' the free market doesn't work? Shit like this, well...shit, doesn't help you build much of a case.

And of course ignores completely the fact that Congress is the only one that can do anything and last I checked the Dems run both houses.

 

[Toro]

That may be the most disingenuousm, mis-leading title I've read in a while. It's an Op-Ed piece first off. I guess it's suppossed to tongue in cheek or something, that by the act of government grabbing these institutions Republicans (who are obviously the only people to blame, no one else could possibly be, of course) are becoming socialists and 'admitting' the free market doesn't work? Shit like this, well...shit, doesn't help you build much of a case.

The government is nationalizing AIG, Freddie, and Fannie. How is that any different from what they did in socialist France or Sweden?

Let's also not forget the tax dollars being used to take bad loans off the books of financial companies and taking on the risk of the Bear Stearns collapse.

These aren't free market solutions.

 

[Bern80]

The government is nationalizing AIG, Freddie, and Fannie. How is that any different from what they did in socialist France or Sweden?

Let's also not forget the tax dollars being used to take bad loans off the books of financial companies and taking on the risk of the Bear Stearns collapse.

These aren't free market solutions.

You could've just said 'yes' in response. You posted an article stating this is the fault of Republicans. There's bullshit statement number one. Bullshit statement number two would be that because they aren't letting the market run it's course, they are admitting the free market doesn't work.

What free market forces are at play (because we have by no means a completely free market), don't fail people. People fail to behave responsibily with in them. I thought Bush's speech tonight was a well explained argument as to why this happened. I'm pretty sure I have never advocated for a totally free market. I have faith that most businesses would not seek to victimize consumers, but invariably some will which is why there does not to be at least some oversite by someone that can protect the consumer. Bush made a very convincing argument for this when he said he is a believer in the free market, but when the actions of business start to have a directly negative impact and victimize the populous than someone needs to step in. The only thing we can hope is this bailout gets reworked so that ultimately it the companies that end up on the hook for this.

 

[editec]

And of course ignores completely the fact that Congress is the only one that can do anything and last I checked the Dems run both houses.

You should try taking a course to learn how a bill gets passed.

Specifically you should learn how the minority which still controls the White House can prevent the majority from getting anything done.

Seseme Street did a fairly good job of explaining it.

Maybe you should start there.

 

[Toro]

You could've just said 'yes' in response. You posted an article stating this is the fault of Republicans. There's bullshit statement number one. Bullshit statement number two would be that because they aren't letting the market run it's course, they are admitting the free market doesn't work.

What free market forces are at play (because we have by no means a completely free market), don't fail people. People fail to behave responsibily with in them. I thought Bush's speech tonight was a well explained argument as to why this happened. I'm pretty sure I have never advocated for a totally free market. I have faith that most businesses would not seek to victimize consumers, but invariably some will which is why there does not to be at least some oversite by someone that can protect the consumer. Bush made a very convincing argument for this when he said he is a believer in the free market, but when the actions of business start to have a directly negative impact and victimize the populous than someone needs to step in. The only thing we can hope is this bailout gets reworked so that ultimately it the companies that end up on the hook for this.

The article says that despite all the rhetoric about free market solutions, the government is not letting the free market play out. Nationalizing industries is what socialist European countries do. This is a tenant of socialism - owning industries. This is most definitely NOT what free markets do.

 

[editec]

It was NEVER a free market.

Such an animal as you people talk about is as real as a unicorn.

How do you have a free market when a government controls the specie?

You don't.

From it's inception the market has ALWAYS been a partner of the government which made it possible to even have a market.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

The article says that despite all the rhetoric about free market solutions, the government is not letting the free market play out. Nationalizing industries is what socialist European countries do. This is a tenant of socialism - owning industries. This is most definitely NOT what free markets do.

In your opinion, how would this scenario play out if this situation were to correct itself without some sort of bailout? I can kind of see the arguments of the doomsday scenario where the free market actually killed itself here.

 

[manifold]

You should try taking a course to learn how a bill gets passed.

Specifically you should learn how the minority which still controls the White House can prevent the majority from getting anything done.

Seseme Street did a fairly good job of explaining it.

Maybe you should start there.

I don't know about Sesame Street, but Schoolhouse Rock did a pretty good three minute explanation.

[youtube]mEJL2Uuv-oQ[/youtube]

 

[Care4all]

Yup has nothing to do with the Democrats creating the ability of the Lending and banking system to make loans to people that did not qualify and could not pay back those loans. You guys amaze me with your heads in the sand. Not only did the dems create the ability they forced the institutions to do so with more regulations.

The socialists are the ones that created this mess by insisting people that could neither qualify or afford loans should get them.

such bull crap...

The lending institutions CREATED these NINJA (no income, no job (or) asset) loans themselves, NO ONE legislated it...the bankers created them...

no one told the banks to issue 50% of their loans as subprime loans...

blame who really is accountable for this mess and that is the financial institution that did not do their jobs in protecting their stock holders, by taking undue risks for simply the immediate dollar in hand.

even phil gramm's amendment and deregulation did not do it, though it allowed it....

the financial institutions did this to themselves, they were greedy crooks and irresponsible, they should NOT get a bailout for their malfeasance and lack of their fiduciary responsibilities....period.