Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: alanrs who wrote (1588)	8/12/2008 9:53:55 AM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 3816

If the price of a functioning market economy, with its obvious benefits to all, is winners and losers, so be it. You are not describing a static situation. Many of the biggest winners spent years as losers. There are positive benefits to losing in a market economy. If we outlaw losing we guarantee there will be no more winners.

To: alanrs who wrote (1588)	8/12/2008 12:24:03 PM
From: c.hinton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3816

alanrs,the market has just proved how it can screw things up to the point of nessecitating gov.intervention...see bear sterns. the market blew it in 29 and again in 87. nobody wants big gov...but large industrialized urban societies demand them. otherwise there is no balancing monied interests. through out the ages monied interests regularly have dropped the ball .....and it was the common people who suffered. check out the Sherman Silver Purchas Act of 1890 en.wikipedia.org small gov cant stand up to big business..... you want one ...you have to accept the other in a democracy. i will point out that this country was founded as a democratic society not a capitalistic one...in fact it was agrarian!