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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (70851)	12/22/2008 9:09:14 AM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

But C2, it's not really the same as that: <a parent giving an irresponsible car-crazed teenager a quart of whiskey and the keys to a Ferrari, then claiming surprise when the inevitable happens. > What's going on is the same pattern I have observed all my life when mob mentality is on the rampage = false accusations etc designed to validate murderous intent against some individual or group. "It's the Jews!" "No, it's the Freemasons!" "Don't be silly, it's the Negroes." "Of course not, it's the Catholics." "Hey, it's the homosexuals". "No way, those commies are it." "Why don't we just lynch the lot and be done with it once and for all". "And don't forget the Tutsis." It works even better against an individual such as Green$pan. For a start, borrowers are not adolescents being given something for free. They are adults making decisions about their own financial assets for themselves with consequences to be carried by themselves. Are you really as you describe or is it just other people who need Nana State to tell them what they are allowed to do? I prefer Alan GreenSpan's idea that borrowers and lenders are the best people to decide in their own interests what they should do with their financial assets and future prospects. When Greenspan said he made a mistake, people mistakenly think he said he got it all wrong. No, he just expected that people would not be financially self-destructive en masse like the apocryphal lemmings over a cliff. I think that's a good bet too and it's just part of the problem of life that at times en masse people do really stupid things such as marching off to Moscow in winter to glory for the Third Reich and Adolf. Even the most casual reader of history would have heard of Napoleon's failed exploits in Russia and have head the 1812 Overture. You are really saying that adults should not be allowed to buy Ferraris or whisky with their own hard-earned money. Or, perhaps they should have to go to the local bureaucrat for permission when they want to go for a drive or get a dram or two of an evening for a tipple. I suspect the bureaucrats would be more likely to sneak a drink themselves and crash the Ferraris while "looking after" it. Putting the government in charge of the money is like putting a fox in charge of a hen house. I back people looking after themselevs and their money and assets better than the government doing it. on their behalf. I would NOT want to hand over my assets to the Investor General of the local government department to provide for me. In fact, if you want to see financial failure on a grand scale, check out the social security funds and planning for the next 50 years. It's called borrow and hope. If you want to see financial destruction on a vast scale, have a look at annual democratic spending around the world. These days, they take half the money and pour nearly all of it down the drain, and often enough use it to actively cause problem, such as funding criminals to torture children to death. That's not their plan, but it's the result. Mqurice