> I am beginning to see a pattern of how you make gross
> simplications to
> try to make the situation fit into your pigeonhole of how
> the
> government can save us by making simple and effective
> regulations to
> control the simple financial systems.
> Unfortunately, the reality is that there have been
> thousands of cases
> of government interference in the markets for decades now,
> and each
> one can and does have many unforseen consequences. It is
> incredibly
> naive to assume that eliminating or adding to a
> ridiculously complex
> system of regulations will immediately result in disaster
> or salvation. Not everything fits into your simple physics
> models, and
> you (and government regulators, and I) do not know anywhere
> near as
> much as we need to if we are to play god with millions or
> billions of
> people interacting in a market.
> ROTFLMAO! You really should consider a career in comedy.
john, you are the one who has the pattern of using simplication and specious
argument to fit your biased rationalizations into pigeonholes... i have been
warned by other members on this list not to respond to your provocations, or
engage with you because it only lowers me to your level, but i genuinely would
like to know why you are so rude? does it give you pleasure to bait people and
arouse their anger? people with your degree of arrogance, condescension, and
paucity of social skills are often compensating for an inferiority complex.
have you ever been diagnosed with a personality disorder? you still haven't
answered my questions who you really are, what is your income bracket, and what
you do for a living that affords you so much time to be so antagonistic??? i
am also curious why you are on this list and what other aliases you have used?
there are some instances when government regulations can control financial
systems in beneficial ways, and sometimes there are times when government
should stay out.
if it is true that some government regulators have bailed out their own former
companies, don't you agree that having the foxes guard the henhouse is a
conflict of interest? what if we had regulators that had no stake in
maintaining the status quo that got us into this mess?
it is quite obvious that appropriate regulation could have prevented the
current economic collapse. there is plenty of blame, and perhaps it is even
true that some of those mistakes were due to an effort to help people in my
income bracket become home owners. why do you think that is so terrible, and
why is it not so terrible to bailout the crooks who caused this mess?
anyway, there are a lot of factors to consider, and i have noticed how you
conveniently ignore arguments you can't refute.
jon
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
