User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 173

  1. #101
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Blaming the economic crisis on any particular thing is a simpletons game.

    There are so many contributors to it such as...

    -home buyers
    -mortgage brokers
    -appraisers
    -investment bankers
    -Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) / Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation)
    -bond rating agencies
    -federal regulators
    -Alan Greenspan

    ...just to name a few.

    However, this is primarily a safety net / moral hazard problem, which is not unique to this crisis. Safety nets (which have become essential in a modern economy) were provided but regulations were not drafted or enforced to limit the consequent risky behavior. As a result, many different people took risks that they shouldn't have because they anticipated the government would bail them out, and it turns out that is exactly what the government has ended up doing. So in essence, this was a regulation problem, not a failure of capitalism, nor something that can be pinned down to any particular socialistic policy.

    Seriously, people need to stop watching FOX or MSNBC and just stick to the facts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  2. #102
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    Blaming the economic crisis on any particular thing is a simpletons game.

    There are so many contributors to it such as...

    -home buyers
    -mortgage brokers
    -appraisers
    -investment bankers
    -Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) / Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation)
    -bond rating agencies
    -federal regulators
    -Alan Greenspan

    ...just to name a few.

    However, this is primarily a safety net / moral hazard problem, which is not unique to this crisis. Safety nets (which have become essential in a modern economy) were provided but regulations were not drafted or enforced to limit the consequent risky behavior. As a result, many different people took risks that they shouldn't have because they anticipated the government would bail them out, and it turns out that is exactly what the government has ended up doing. So in essence, this was a regulation problem, not a failure of capitalism, nor something that can be pinned down to any particular socialistic policy.

    Seriously, people need to stop watching FOX or MSNBC and just stick to the facts.
    I agree that was part of the problem, and again, the problem has become the NOn-solution (going and bailing them out). Another aspect to this is the fact that these companies like Fannie have become so damn large that their collapse would bring down everything around them. I'm not saying this is the case, as I have not researched it enough, but I suspect these companies should've fallen by the wayside long ago, and were probably propped up in part by the government all this time allowing them to grow so large. The fact that they have been able to grow so huge and make the economy so dependent on their health, while at the same time being so close to collapse is suspicious as hell. I am GUESSING that these companies have been propped up by the government, allowing them to grow to this size, instead of them being taken down long ago when the effects wouldn't have been nearly so dire. That is essentially how capitalism goes. Huge companies are really supposed to fail with time so that these things don't happen (the way they are now). In fact, I'm quite confident the government added to the size of this ticking time bomb.

  3. #103
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    I agree that was part of the problem, and again, the problem has become the NOn-solution (going and bailing them out). Another aspect to this is the fact that these companies like Fannie have become so damn large that their collapse would bring down everything around them. I'm not saying this is the case, as I have not researched it enough, but I suspect these companies should've fallen by the wayside long ago, and were probably propped up in part by the government all this time allowing them to grow so large. The fact that they have been able to grow so huge and make the economy so dependent on their health, while at the same time being so close to collapse is suspicious as hell. I am GUESSING that these companies have been propped up by the government, allowing them to grow to this size, instead of them being taken down long ago when the effects wouldn't have been nearly so dire. That is essentially how capitalism goes. Huge companies are really supposed to fail with time so that these things don't happen (the way they are now). In fact, I'm quite confident the government added to the size of this ticking time bomb.
    i wonder if they could expand the anti trust (like to whoever looks into those things), to include "too big to fail". As in, in the future, not only would there be anti-trust investigation to break up monopolies, but maybe investigation into "too big to fail" companies (that could then be broken up).

  4. #104
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    What's funny is that if all the effects of violating the contisution were removed and then prevented from being further put into place, this country wouldn't even be recognizable.
    It would be recognizably better, I know that. There are so many ridiculous abuses that happen all the time in this country. It's disheartening.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #105
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    It would be recognizably better, I know that. There are so many ridiculous abuses that happen all the time in this country. It's disheartening.
    Well, actually you don't know that, which is exactly my point. You're just assuming that if we strung ourselves up by the constitution things would be better rather than worse.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #106
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Well, actually you don't know that, which is exactly my point. You're just assuming that if we strung ourselves up by the constitution things would be better rather than worse.
    and so by Magics flawless logic, inference goes out the window! because we cannot 100% prove the constitution served america well, FUCK THE CONSTITUTION!

    why did we EVER think we needed that nonsensical bill of rights crap anyways!?

  7. #107
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Well, actually you don't know that, which is exactly my point. You're just assuming that if we strung ourselves up by the constitution things would be better rather than worse.
    This form of logic, in your attempts to be objective and "pragmatic" lacks perspective on the human elements that can never be severed from this reality. Logic must be tempered with knowledge, wisdom, and in all inclusive perspective of the elements within the subject. Without it it is just as fool hearty as any feeling or emotion.

    Logically you can say that we may be just as good not following the constitution because we've never been completely without one, sand thus the possibility exists that we would be fine. However, this logic completely fails to predict any outcomes based on human behavior, history, or common sense. In other words, I notice that your logic tends to be haphazard, and lacks the integration of all the factors involved in the world of human beings.

  8. #108
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Babylon Candle View Post
    and so by Magics flawless logic, inference goes out the window! because we cannot 100% prove the constitution served america well, FUCK THE CONSTITUTION!

    why did we EVER think we needed that nonsensical bill of rights crap anyways!?
    I'm afraid you're the one making a logical error here, as I never made the argument you are claiming I made. Incorrect inference and/or strawman argument is being commited here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    This form of logic, in your attempts to be objective and "pragmatic" lacks perspective on the human elements that can never be severed from this reality. Logic must be tempered with knowledge, wisdom, and in all inclusive perspective of the elements within the subject. Without it it is just as fool hearty as any feeling or emotion.

    Logically you can say that we may be just as good not following the constitution because we've never been completely without one, sand thus the possibility exists that we would be fine. However, this logic completely fails to predict any outcomes based on human behavior, history, or common sense. In other words, I notice that your logic tends to be haphazard, and lacks the integration of all the factors involved in the world of human beings.
    Actually, it's my experience with sociology and psychology that makes me find excessively legalistic philosophies flawed. This constitution worship (and yes, I would go so far as to call it worship) is indeed an excessiveley legalistic philosophy. Sometimes obeying the constitution is more problematic than good. The civil war is a subject in which Lincoln gets a lot of shit from constitutional scholars, but I think it would have been a mistake for him to try taking an approach purely guided by constitutional law, a big mistake (besides, how do you apply the constitution to a fragment of your country that is violently insisting it is not your country, and not under your constitution?).

    I think of the constitution as provisional, or perhaps more accurately as conventional. I'd also say it's advisory. But trying to follow it to a hair is silly, and what's even sillier is expecting or demanding people to do that. This is what I mean by realism. The constitution cannot enforce itself, and people will not feel some powerfully inate drive to obey it. I know my views are not orthodox, but I view all law and policy as approximate, because in reality, that's the only way law ever manifests itself.

    One last point in this post is that the founding fathers didn't even agree on this constitution. And two of the three that did push it, eventually turned on each other after it was ratified and new questions came up. It's also over 225 years old. I don't know if any of you ever read The Federalist Papers, but you'll find that a lot of the reasons Jay, Madison, and Hamilton pressed for this constitution were strictly or at least partially contemporary. Don't these factors create a lot of room for the constitution to be incorrect or insufficient?
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I'm afraid you're the one making a logical error here, as I never made the argument you are claiming I made. Incorrect inference and/or strawman argument is being commited here.
    When you see the use of terms like “youth indoctrination camps” you should know there’s nothing you’re going to say to get through to some of these posters. They see Obama as the next Joe Stalin.
    i believe that i am in hell, therefore i am there.
    –arthur rimbaud

  10. #110
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mysterio View Post
    When you see the use of terms like “youth indoctrination camps” you should know there’s nothing you’re going to say to get through to some of these posters. They see Obama as the next Joe Stalin.
    Yes, you're probably right about that. I don't know why I feel such a need to respond. It's like OCD.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. Barack Obama. Discuss.
    By Cindyrella in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 10:36 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Community Poetry Service
    By niffer in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-13-2008, 10:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO