Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Of course it is more complicated than I put it but do you really want a 30 page dissertation? The fact was the banks were making bad bets because the quasi-govt programs FM and FM were in effect guaranteeing them not because of good monetary policy but because of political reasons. The fact is that political influence regardless of side will screw up the economy.
Very few banks are getting govt money.
No one said that free markets dont need some regulation but Krugman is using the current crisis which was caused by regulation in some ways to further his cause. And winning a Nobel prize is basically only possible if one is liberal.
My post was not politically leaning but stating the danger of political involvement in broad economic policy.
by the way in science there are no politics hence the lack of political involvement and the reason that it makes sense.
|
No. maybe 20 or so...
Its just interesting how diff. people start off
explaining a problem.
1. Govt. forcing banks to make loans to poor people without homes
that have no business being in home because of lack of hard work or some other fault of their own. (extreme)
2. The greed that Madoff, Enron chiefs, and so many other executives exhibit has finally caught up with them and put all of us in the sh it hole. Rich folks suck and will strip you clean, and now look what happens. In Japan Madoff would be required to kill himself.(extreme)
many conversations begin with something like the above.
guess its fun...