Quote:
Originally Posted by Members Only
If the Fed could prevent it? The Fed is one of the main reasons the US is so in debt. So now you have a case, where the ultra rich, who try to avoid taxation at all costs, are being bailed out by working class tax dollars.
|
Some ultra rich, perhaps, but for the most part, no, it is still the wealthier that pay the majority of the taxes.
Quote:
|
So Americans began to have comparable standards of living with Europeans, only after the formation of the Fed in 1913?
|
I think the real point is that every advanced economy has government intervention in their markets.
I also wanted to note that it wasn't the
stock market that was failing, it was the entirety of the financial system. There's a good reason for the disconnect between the average person and the economists/people in the field - this stuff is highly interconnected and far removed from most people. What was being looked at wasn't just a loss of some pensioner's funds. We were talking about the complete lack of liquidity of debt. Debt that is required to consolidate the hurting companies. Debt that keeps day to day operations running. Debt that finances capital projects. Debt that allows mortgages, car payments and so forth.
The reason why it AIG and the like ran straight into a wall was because they had no bridging money to keep operating. It's the same reasons for the short-selling protections. It can actually induce the collapse rather than provide price stability.
That's the reason for the broad act. It allows the government to provide liquidity. It's not the solution I'm looking for, but I figure there is no chance that the US would ever allow broad regulation and intervention in their banking system.