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 : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (229573)	11/20/2009 12:27:32 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Finally we have a little agreement, but unfortunately, only a little. I clearly understand the moral hazard issue of the bailouts, and I don't like it at all. What you, and most "free market" types want is a system that bubbles, then implodes (both without intervention), and you think that this will eventually lead people to not cause the bubbles in the first place. What I see is such systems still have lots of winners, and those winners will cause similar problems again. Lots of those idiots at AIG London made plenty of money while blowing up the system, even if AIG had gone bust and they lost their jobs going forward. On the other hand, plenty of people in Norwegian hamlets lost their retirement as a result. This is a game that will repeat, given lax oversight, and a little time. because the innovators are a tad more clever at such things than in the dwellers in hamlets. You need to read page 6 & 7 of the link I gave you do get a clear understanding of what happened. Then perhaps you can comment on the relative role of the government vs market innovation in all this.