--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason <jedi_sp...@...> wrote: > > > Socialism works only on a rudimentry level. like food security and > medical security. It fails to work in the higher areas of the economy. > Socialism cannot produce a Nike shoes or a Mercedes car
Which might be a good outcome. The world could do with a few less over priced, overhyped Nikes and Mercedes gas guzzlers. Cut education budgets and you get a nation and world of retarded glamor dazzle-drugged consumers. > > The unholy nexus between huge corporates and politicians leads to > corruption. I agree with you. Innovative technologies can be real game > changers. We are heading into a third wave civilisation. Oddly, the name of a book 30 years ago bu Alvin Toffler of Future Shock fame -- (and ironically a mentor to Newt G.) Not a bad read. But the concept of third wave has been around for sometime. Actually fascism in the 20s and 30's was seen as the third way (between capitalism and communism). > Reagan administration dismantled many of the safeguard banking > regulations. Actually, it was the Clinton Admin. The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 eliminated "restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated." Championed by former Goldman-Sachs co-chairman and Clinton treasury Secretary/ Clinton called Rubin the greatest treasury secretary since Alexander Hamilton. So much for that old Clinton magic and brain power. If you hear that a former Goldman Sachs exec is advocating something, run, RUN in the opposite direction. Look what Rubin, Paulsen, and scores of ex Goldman alum have done to the economy. And actually I think Nixon, Carter and Clinton deregulated more than Reagan did. And not all deregulation is bad. Do you want one telecom local and long distance. We would still be paying $2 a minute long distance to call 100 miles away. Do you want gold illegal to own and pegged at $35 / oz? > This is because the bitter memories of the depression 1930's began to fade > away. De-regulated banking has again created chaos. > > --- On Sun, 3/21/10, tartbrain <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Today is the First Day of Spring! > Date: Sunday, March 21, 2010, 1:22 PM > > > The diversity of opinion in the world is a wonderous thing. And that one > would be in favor of sustained world poverty is an intriguing view. > > If you actually mean that you hate: > > - facade democracies that allow corrupt, crony elitists to rape and pillage > the economy > > - many instances of inappropriately regulated markets, often the result of > the above, > > -current schemes of regulation that are often corrupt and a tool of > neo-robber barons, > > - global corporations allowed to become too big to fail and have the world > economy by the balls, > > - bailout of global corporate behemoths by the US because their war room rape > and pillage headquarters are in new york, > > - the american dream of equal opportunity is a travesty as education receives > lower and lower priority > > - that all corporations and citizens should be responsible for the costs they > cause and incur on society -- pollution is a good example. > > then we are brothers in arms at the barricades -- in staunch disgust and > rebellion at current political and economic structures > > However, if you are dismissing or deriding the transformative power of > appropriately regulated markets (and we have a long way to go to reach > optimum regulatory levels and structures), entrepreneurship and innovation to > lift billions out of poverty (still a long way to go) then we do differ. > Yannus, founder of Grameen Bank -- the first micro-finance bank for the poor, > and Nobel prize winner, is an enthusiastic advocate of markets, capitalizing > the poor, and the failure of government programs, to raise the world out of > poverty. I tend to agree with him from what I have seen. > > And if you are arguing that command and control top down allocation of > capital is more efficient than appropriately regulated markets to allocate > capital to innovative and fast growing, game changing technologies and > services, then we also disagree. > > > > >
