I agree. Though, I think TR's actions were necessary within a capitalist system. Competition is the central pillar to the workings of capitalism, so I don't begrudge TR for ensuring it.

 

I'm confident, at least, that the banks will be recapitalized and released from government's hold in our current situation.

 

Government doesn't let go. It tends to increase its grip and to perpetuate itself.

Government doesn't let go. It tends to increase its grip and to perpetuate itself.

 

In a very general sense, yes. But, look at both Thatcher and Reagan. They were able to privatize and deregulate when the economy demanded it. I don't think the government's ownership of the banks will ever produce a further justification for holding them, especially with the massive debt the government would be compelled to be rid of them.

In a very general sense, yes. But, look at both Thatcher and Reagan. They were able to privatize and deregulate when the economy demanded it. I don't think the government's ownership of the banks will ever produce a further justification for holding them, especially with the massive debt the government would be compelled to be rid of them.

 

Who do you think would be more likely to privatize and deregulate within the next 4 years- Obama or McCain? Or neither?

Socialism. I have always thought it was a ridiculous idea to do this. I do not walk lock step with the establishment. Believe me.

Who do you think would be more likely to privatize and deregulate within the next 4 years- Obama or McCain? Or neither?

 

Due to the current situation (ex. public opinion) I don't see either making much of a push for it.

I agree. I don't think we can pin this one on McCain or Obama though. Our government as a whole and us for letting it happen bear the responsibility for this MISTAKE.

Excellent point. :thumb:

Who do you think would be more likely to privatize and deregulate within the next 4 years- Obama or McCain? Or neither?

For me, it's clearly neither. And as long as the quality of candidates offered by the Dempublicans remains the same, I think I would stick with neither.

For me, it's clearly neither. And as long as the quality of candidates offered by the Dempublicans remains the same, I think I would stick with neither.

Yeah, well, I didn't ask you. I knew you'd say that. Habib agrees, and so do I.

What is so holy and sacred about a free market??

 

If you are willing to work hard enough and smart enough, you can succeed. If you aren't willing, then you won't. In other words you earn your own keep and don't depend on the government or anyone else to provide it for you.

 

I also am still upset with Obama and McCain for signing this bill. At least it wasn't as bad as what was first proposed, but it still reaks of corporate welfare.

Excellent point. :thumb:

 

While I agree 110%, we also have to agree that this issue has hit McCain very hard. He was ahead by 3-7 points (depending on what poll you looked at and they changed every few hours) and after this occurred, the polls have done a complete 180. Obama has been very effective at tying McCain to Bush even though McCain is not responsible for this any more than Obama is.

I'll play.

 

1. Socialism
   
2. Stupidity
   
3. I agree
   

 

Where are all the real leaders in this nation?

Totally agree.

Yeah, well, I didn't ask you. I knew you'd say that. Habib agrees, and so do I.

LOL, just thought I'd put my input out there.

 

:devil:

While I agree 110%, we also have to agree that this issue has hit McCain very hard. He was ahead by 3-7 points (depending on what poll you looked at and they changed every few hours) and after this occurred, the polls have done a complete 180. Obama has been very effective at tying McCain to Bush even though McCain is not responsible for this any more than Obama is.

You are right. I'm still wondering why McCain didn't use that, what I think was, very effective line in the last debate earlier.