Anti-coal, Anti-gun liberal Senator to campaign in KY for ALG

[Bert]

Andy and Barney busted the cheats in Mayberry before they had a chance to infiltrate Wall Street.

 

OK, I guess?

 

As far as your second statement, it's tough to "harm competition" when there ain't hardly any left in many economic sectors. Called an oligopoly.

 

I am well aware of what an oligopoly is an history tells me one of the things that makes it difficult for new competition to come in and challenge the oligopoly is stupid regulation. The best example was the airline industry. Before the late 70's, prices, routes, and other aspects of the industry were regulated by the government under the assumption that big brother government was protecting the consumers. Eventually even an incompetent president like Carter realized that such regulations were not protecting anyone, only keeping airfare so high that the average American could not afford to fly. The "protective" regulations were dropped, new regional discount airlines popped up, airfares went down, the number of routes increased and other benefits to the consumer due to the government relieving itself of excessive control over commerce calling it consumer advocacy which is laughable.

[Mitch Rapp]

OK, I guess?

 

 

 

I am well aware of what an oligopoly is an history tells me one of the things that makes it difficult for new competition to come in and challenge the oligopoly is stupid regulation. The best example was the airline industry. Before the late 70's, prices, routes, and other aspects of the industry were regulated by the government under the assumption that big brother government was protecting the consumers. Eventually even an incompetent president like Carter realized that such regulations were not protecting anyone, only keeping airfare so high that the average American could not afford to fly. The "protective" regulations were dropped, new regional discount airlines popped up, airfares went down, the number of routes increased and other benefits to the consumer due to the government relieving itself of excessive control over commerce calling it consumer advocacy which is laughable.

A similar thing happened with the heavily regulated phone industry. When the AT & T monopoly was broken up and more competition was allowed, phone rates plummeted. It's hard to believe that international phone rates were once measured in dollars per minute.

 

Competition always benefits consumers. The kind of heavy-handed regulation that socialists like Elizabeth Warren push on consumers inhibits competition and the innovation that it brings to the market.

[Twotoplace]

OK, I guess?

 

 

 

I am well aware of what an oligopoly is an history tells me one of the things that makes it difficult for new competition to come in and challenge the oligopoly is stupid regulation. The best example was the airline industry. Before the late 70's, prices, routes, and other aspects of the industry were regulated by the government under the assumption that big brother government was protecting the consumers. Eventually even an incompetent president like Carter realized that such regulations were not protecting anyone, only keeping airfare so high that the average American could not afford to fly. The "protective" regulations were dropped, new regional discount airlines popped up, airfares went down, the number of routes increased and other benefits to the consumer due to the government relieving itself of excessive control over commerce calling it consumer advocacy which is laughable.

Perhaps you and Mr. Rapp would care to discuss the financial meltdown of '08. Unfortunately, we've reached the point in free-market economics where government must step in with strict regulation lest those companies at the top of the oligopoly food chain take down the entire system.

 

I believe the correct term for this behavior is greed.

 

We are long past the day when we can allow big business to police itself.

[Mitch Rapp]

Perhaps you and Mr. Rapp would care to discuss the financial meltdown of '08. Unfortunately, we've reached the point in free-market economics where government must step in with strict regulation lest those companies at the top of the oligopoly food chain take down the entire system.

 

I believe the correct term for this behavior is greed.

 

We are long past the day when we can allow big business to police itself.

There is no right time to turn to socialism for solutions. How many examples do liberal Democrats need of the failure of socialism to understand that capitalism has has lifted more people out of poverty than any economic system in history? Even the communists in Beijing finally turned to capitalism to fuel their economy. American liberals still have not learned anything about economics from world history.

 

American business was more regulated in 2008 than at any previous time in American history. Thanks to Obama's brand of socialism, American businesses are being strangled with even more regulations than were in place in 2008.

 

Our federal government's policies were responsible for the 2008 recession and federal policies will ultimately precipitate the collapse of our economy.

 

The Obama recovery has been the weakest one since the Great Depression and its weakness is no accident. It is foolish to expend so much time and effort blaming Bush for Obama's policy failures.

[Twotoplace]

Our federal government's policies were responsible for the 2008 recession and federal policies will ultimately precipitate the collapse of our economy.

Wrong. Regulations don't spring up in vacuums. They're enacted by the government (of the people) to stem unethical and illegal business practices, such as the Ponzi scheme brought forth by big bankers in '08.

 

There's an old saying: Every company has the union it deserves. We can now expand that: Every company has the regulations it deserves.

[All Tell]

This is fun. One side argues logically, the other spouts talking points.

 

In the meantime Rubber Stamp Allie still has the most liberal member of the Senate coming campaign for her. Way not to be beholden to the party elite Allie.

[Twotoplace]

We need less government regulation so we can have more financial market meltdowns like '08. Makes complete sense to me.

 

As an aside, this is usually the point where someone jumps in and blames poor people for the '08 financial meltdown.

[Mitch Rapp]

Wrong. Regulations don't spring up in vacuums. They're enacted by the government (of the people) to stem unethical and illegal business practices, such as the Ponzi scheme brought forth by big bankers in '08.

 

There's an old saying: Every company has the union it deserves. We can now expand that: Every company has the regulations it deserves.

You act as if the big banks and Wall Street firms are not making out like bandits under Obama's watch. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Just who do you think writes most of the laws and regulations that drive up the cost of doing business in the U.S.? If neither the president nor the members of Congress even read Obamacare, then who actually wrote the law? Lobbyists and their lawyers, that's who. It does not matter whether they are Democrats or Republicans, the system is corrupt.

 

Both parties are pro-big business because big businesses benefit from heavy regulation. Small start-up businesses cannot afford to hire the staff that is needed to navigate through thousands of complex regulations. So large businesses fill the campaign war chests of slimy politicians like Obama, Boehner, and Reid.

 

People who demonize Bush and single him out for the economic nosedive of 2008 are fools. The free market or "greed" as you refer to it, did not cause the 2008 recession, government regulations did.

 

Campaigning with a socialist is a dumb move by Grimes. It will make it easier for McConnell to run as a good old boy from Kentucky who shares the state's conservative values.

[Mitch Rapp]

This is fun. One side argues logically, the other spouts talking points.

 

In the meantime Rubber Stamp Allie still has the most liberal member of the Senate coming campaign for her. Way not to be beholden to the party elite Allie.

Arguing with socialists and their supporters does seem unfair. I am no Milton Friedman or Thomas Sowell, but then again, I don't have to be. :lol2:

 

There problem is that socialism has never worked as well as capitalism anywhere that it has been tried. At some point, countries either learn their lesson and move back toward a free market system or they go broke. Our politicians currently have us sprinting down the path to bankruptcy, but the liberals among us think more entitlements and more restrictions on the free market is needed.

 

Grimes should have rejected Warren's "help" and begged Manchin to teach her how to campaign as a conservative and govern as a liberal.