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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (614364)	6/2/2011 1:27:03 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577380

The government-managed approach is based on the quixotic notion that regulators can control the tides of boom and bust. It never works because politics almost always messes up the process. Even the most recent fiscal crisis was helped along by politicians who wanted to cash in on the real estate craze. The US had its longest economic expansion under Clinton when the regulators were very active. Like with many issues, American conservatism has failed to put forward a successful economic plan that benefits all classes and not just the rich.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (614364)	6/2/2011 2:11:09 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577380

"Every attempt at communism or socialism eventually ends up in failure." You realize that all Scandinavian countries and most European countries are largely socialist? And NOT "failures"? So, your statement is ridiculous. Also, what's YOUR definition of "success"? OUR crumbling example? Some say communism just collapsed FIRST..

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (614364)	6/2/2011 3:55:48 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577380

"Every attempt at communism or socialism eventually ends up in failure." Half right. This, of course, isn't relevant to the discussion. "Boom and bust cycles are a fact of life, not the result of laissez-faire policies." First part is incorrect. The second only partially so. "The hands-off approach accepts that fact and puts faith in the private sector being able to absorb it all." And that has been proven to not be the case. "The government-managed approach is based on the quixotic notion that regulators can control the tides of boom and bust." Nothing quixotic about it. At the very minimum, it moderates the busts so the majority doesn't loose everything they have. "It never works because politics almost always messes up the process" Nonsense. "Even the most recent fiscal crisis was helped along by politicians who wanted to cash in on the real estate craze." Possibly, but I haven't seen any evidence of that. Perhaps you can supply some? The most recent fiscal crisis is the result of the steady dismantlement of all the safeguards put into place since the Great Depression. We finally got the right combination of lack of safeguards, coupled with the unlimited greed of the financial industry. Because their greed is unlimited, as is the effects. Why do you hate the middle class so much?