On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:50 PM, John Williams <jwilliams4...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Doug Pensinger<brig...@zo.com> wrote: > > > I think it's disingenuous to say that we had no idea what would have > > happened. Many more banks would have failed, > > Yes, but that is not necessarily a cost. In many cases, I consider it a > benefit. Haven't you argued that the failing banks and businesses are the result of cascading effects of public policy? And if so, why would you not expect further cascading effects? Isn't it common sense that major failures are likely to trigger other failures? Haven't we seen that repeatedly in our nation and others? It makes a lot of sense to me to intervene as little as possible, but you seem to be arguing that any intervention is wrong. How do you buy time to fix the system? Do you let the whole thing collapse just to make sure that your point is clear and some reform is needed? Isn't that devastately clear already? People, even liberals, can learn without enduring the worst of consequences. You sound like a doctor who advocates letting people die in the emergency room to teach everybody else a safety lesson. Nick
_______________________________________________ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
