In a truly free market, there is no regulation. That means corporations would have to self-regulate...
Not true. The acting of the participants in the market are also a regulating force. You are either ignoring this or unaware of it or don't believe it exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
We have laws created by lawmakers we elected to represent us for the most part as a reaction to wrongs previously done. Why do you think we have a minimum wage?
Because we have people who don't understand economics making laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Why is slavery outlawed?
Because the government that endorsed, supported and protected this abhorrent practice finally came to it senses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Why are their antidiscriminatory regulations?
Because we have people passing laws that don't respect the basic rights of individuals to discriminate however much we might dislike the act.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Why are their anti-monopoly laws?
Because some less successful competitors got mad and decided to bribe elected officials to use the power the of State instead of competing on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Currently, corporations are buying our officials in government, corrupting it, and you think removing the government would fix the problem? Yes, lets get government out of the way so the corporations can enact what they please directly on us. We need a government truly representative of the populous. As much as I hate using political cliches, we need to get money out of politics. Government isn't the problem. It's who influences the government against the will of the people that's the problem.
I'm sorry if you are unable to see the irony and flaw in your thinking here.
The idea that the so called Free Market is god just makes me cringe.
And the idea that The Market will regulate itself if it was left untainted is even more laughable.
We have seen many instances what the Unregulated market can do and has done. Yet people keep forgetting lessons of the past. Remember how the US and the rest of the world got into the 1929 Depression?
All of the Deregulation that the Free Market proponents have been calling for since the 80s has finally got us to where we are today! The Anti-trust, Glass-Steegal, you name it. It was like a Casino types of gambling that wasn't gonna last. And remember of the Savings and Loans fiasco?
Yet, even now, we still have those that cry even louder for more Deregulation so they can rake in profits in the short terms, and shaft us w/ Debts when the Markets come crashing down in the long term!
We have seen many instances what the Unregulated market can do and has done.
We have? Like?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
Remember how the US and the rest of the world got into the 1929 Depression?
Yes. I do know. Apparently you don't though because you seem to think it it attributable to the "free market" instead of the interventions of the Federal government under Hoover and FDR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
All of the Deregulation that the Free Market proponents have been calling for since the 80s has finally got us to where we are today! The Anti-trust, Glass-Steegal you name it. It was like a Casino types of gambling that wasn't gonna last. And remember of the Savings and Loans fiasco?
I'm wondering what any of those things have to do with a free market.
So why is it that Americans have come to believe that tax cuts are good for everyone? The answer is that for decades now the überrich have relentlessly spent money to make Americans believe that lower taxes are the answer to all of America’s problems. They’ve done this partly through the media they own and partly through funding “think tanks” that legitimize their Great Tax Con.
Richard Mellon Scaife, a Pittsburgh native and heir to the Mellon family businesses, is a conservative billionaire who carries the title of publisher of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the second-fiddle newspaper to that city’s larger daily, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Although daily newspapers generally have not been faring well lately, Scaife’s Tribune-Review is a ridiculously expensive enterprise, given its paltry circulation of 50,000.
According to a 2007 report in the Post-Gazette, based on Scaife’s divorce filings, his ex-wife contended that the Tribune-Review “should be considered a hobby or personal cause rather than a business investment because the paper has lost $20 million to $30 million annually since it began publishing in 1992.”4
His ex-wife had it right—the newspaper is a “personal cause” for Scaife.
If you do the math, you come up with more than $300 million that Scaife has lost on the newspaper. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) considers an activity a business (instead of a hobby) if there is “a reasonable expectation” of earning a profit and if it makes a profit in at least three of the past five years (although they’ve never gone after Scaife on this; as Leona Helmsley famously said, “Only the little people pay taxes”). ] —Thom Hartmann
—You gotta be serious right? The Depression, the current Recession, the Savings and loans crisis from the 80s and 90s!
Yes. I do know. Apparently you don't though because you seem to think it it attributable to the "free market" instead of the interventions of the Federal government under Hoover and FDR.
—You mean the corruption and the monopolies that go hand in hand in an unregulated or not enough regulation w/ loopholes and such.
I'm wondering what any of those things have to do with a free market.
Your idea of an untained Free Market is pure fantasy from the Chicago types of Milton Friedman full of baloney!
Are you saying that the current financial crisis started with government intervention as well?
Yes. Of course it was. Minimally it was started from the Fed created housing bubble. But there were other interventions and distortions as well. Not the least of which is the crisis prolonging "stimulus" and bailouts.
That's right, the Hedge Funds, the Casino types of gambling of the Financial sector, the lending practices for the Mortgage industry (u mean they didn't lobby for less regulation?)
Are you kidding me? Talking about twisting facts. The Housing bubble created by the Fed?
That's right, the Hedge Funds, the Casino types of gambling of the Financial sector, the lending practices for the Mortgage industry (u mean they didn't lobby for less regulation?)
Who knew they were going to get bailed out by the feds if they got in trouble. We call that moral hazard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
Are you kidding me? Talking about twisting facts. The Housing bubble created by the Fed?
And I forgot to mention all of those so called Mortage derivatives types of investments that area allowed. Where they can bundle all of these bad mortgages together and dump em into the market.
And please don't tell us this is not due to Deregulation!
Yes. Of course it was. Minimally it was started from the Fed created housing bubble. But there were other interventions and distortions as well. Not the least of which is the crisis prolonging "stimulus" and bailouts.
OK. Then a question. Do you see the proposal of forcing investment banking and savings banking to be separate a bad regulatory tactic or a good one? Actually I'm pretty sure of your answer, but if it is as I suspect, I'll stop here.
Please change the title to "Apple LEGALLY paid in taxes"
All of you would do the EXACT same thing too.
Nope. You are wrong. I pay taxes every year and I use the standard deductions. I don't use any loopholes whatsoever. I don't turn in my charitable donations as a tax deduction. I didn't request the deduction for my hybrid back in '04. Please don't claim everyone would do the same thing. Many people are not greedy people who feel they find a way to keep every buck. I live a basic (low middle class) life and don't feel the "need" to fill my life with as many $$$ as I can make.
[ Scaife is not alone among billionaires flushing money down such news operations. As my friend and colleague Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks pointed out in a Daily Kos diary in July 2009, billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million per year on the New York Post, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million per year on the Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on the Washington Times.5
So why are these guys willing to lose so much money funding conservative media? Why do they bulk-buy every right-wing book that comes out to push it to the top of the bestseller list and then give away the copies to “subscribers” to their Web sites and publications? Why do they fund to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars per year right-wing think tanks and training programs and lobbying organizations?
The answer is pretty straightforward: they do it because it buys them respectability and gets their con job out there. And one of their most important goals is lower taxes—for millionaires and billionaires like themselves.
Scaife, for instance, has used the various family foundations he oversees to fund conservative causes over the years to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, including more than $20 million to just the Heritage Foundation. All you have to do to see how influential Heritage has been is to read its own propaganda. When President Reagan took office in 1981, Heritage dropped a 1,100-page tome titled Mandate for Leadership on his desk, which he promptly handed out to his entire cabinet. Among its achievements over the years, Heritage lists this under 1981: ] —Thom Hartmann
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
In a truly free market, there is no regulation. That means corporations would have to self-regulate...
Not true. The acting of the participants in the market are also a regulating force. You are either ignoring this or unaware of it or don't believe it exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
We have laws created by lawmakers we elected to represent us for the most part as a reaction to wrongs previously done. Why do you think we have a minimum wage?
Because we have people who don't understand economics making laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Why is slavery outlawed?
Because the government that endorsed, supported and protected this abhorrent practice finally came to it senses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Why are their antidiscriminatory regulations?
Because we have people passing laws that don't respect the basic rights of individuals to discriminate however much we might dislike the act.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Why are their anti-monopoly laws?
Because some less successful competitors got mad and decided to bribe elected officials to use the power the of State instead of competing on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverpraxis
Currently, corporations are buying our officials in government, corrupting it, and you think removing the government would fix the problem? Yes, lets get government out of the way so the corporations can enact what they please directly on us. We need a government truly representative of the populous. As much as I hate using political cliches, we need to get money out of politics. Government isn't the problem. It's who influences the government against the will of the people that's the problem.
I'm sorry if you are unable to see the irony and flaw in your thinking here.
The idea that the so called Free Market is god just makes me cringe.
And the idea that The Market will regulate itself if it was left untainted is even more laughable.
We have seen many instances what the Unregulated market can do and has done. Yet people keep forgetting lessons of the past. Remember how the US and the rest of the world got into the 1929 Depression?
All of the Deregulation that the Free Market proponents have been calling for since the 80s has finally got us to where we are today! The Anti-trust, Glass-Steegal, you name it. It was like a Casino types of gambling that wasn't gonna last. And remember of the Savings and Loans fiasco?
Yet, even now, we still have those that cry even louder for more Deregulation so they can rake in profits in the short terms, and shaft us w/ Debts when the Markets come crashing down in the long term!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
We have seen many instances what the Unregulated market can do and has done.
We have? Like?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
Remember how the US and the rest of the world got into the 1929 Depression?
Yes. I do know. Apparently you don't though because you seem to think it it attributable to the "free market" instead of the interventions of the Federal government under Hoover and FDR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
All of the Deregulation that the Free Market proponents have been calling for since the 80s has finally got us to where we are today! The Anti-trust, Glass-Steegal you name it. It was like a Casino types of gambling that wasn't gonna last. And remember of the Savings and Loans fiasco?
I'm wondering what any of those things have to do with a free market.
[ How They Did It
So why is it that Americans have come to believe that tax cuts are good for everyone? The answer is that for decades now the überrich have relentlessly spent money to make Americans believe that lower taxes are the answer to all of America’s problems. They’ve done this partly through the media they own and partly through funding “think tanks” that legitimize their Great Tax Con.
Richard Mellon Scaife, a Pittsburgh native and heir to the Mellon family businesses, is a conservative billionaire who carries the title of publisher of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the second-fiddle newspaper to that city’s larger daily, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Although daily newspapers generally have not been faring well lately, Scaife’s Tribune-Review is a ridiculously expensive enterprise, given its paltry circulation of 50,000.
According to a 2007 report in the Post-Gazette, based on Scaife’s divorce filings, his ex-wife contended that the Tribune-Review “should be considered a hobby or personal cause rather than a business investment because the paper has lost $20 million to $30 million annually since it began publishing in 1992.”4
His ex-wife had it right—the newspaper is a “personal cause” for Scaife.
If you do the math, you come up with more than $300 million that Scaife has lost on the newspaper. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) considers an activity a business (instead of a hobby) if there is “a reasonable expectation” of earning a profit and if it makes a profit in at least three of the past five years (although they’ve never gone after Scaife on this; as Leona Helmsley famously said, “Only the little people pay taxes”). ] —Thom Hartmann
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
We have? Like?
—You gotta be serious right? The Depression, the current Recession, the Savings and loans crisis from the 80s and 90s!
Yes. I do know. Apparently you don't though because you seem to think it it attributable to the "free market" instead of the interventions of the Federal government under Hoover and FDR.
—You mean the corruption and the monopolies that go hand in hand in an unregulated or not enough regulation w/ loopholes and such.
I'm wondering what any of those things have to do with a free market.
Your idea of an untained Free Market is pure fantasy from the Chicago types of Milton Friedman full of baloney!
The Depression was attributed to FDR intervention? OMG, talking about reinterpreting history!
I can't think of anything in a society that can exist w/out some kinds of laws or regulation.
So what makes some people think that this so called “Market” that is a manmade idea the exception? Such arrogance if you asked me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
The Depression was attributed to FDR intervention? OMG, talking about reinterpreting history!
Sorry if I understand the history and economics better than your government-school education gave you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Sorry if I understand the history and economics better than your government-school education gave you.
You obviously forgot the tiny detail that The Great Depression was called The Great Republican Depression before it was changed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Sorry if I understand the history and economics better than your government-school education gave you.
Are you saying that the current financial crisis started with government intervention as well?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
You obviously forgot the tiny detail that The Great Depression was called The Great Republican Depression before it was changed!
Score one for you! Irrelevant point of the day!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen
Are you saying that the current financial crisis started with government intervention as well?
Yes. Of course it was. Minimally it was started from the Fed created housing bubble. But there were other interventions and distortions as well. Not the least of which is the crisis prolonging "stimulus" and bailouts.
That's right, the Hedge Funds, the Casino types of gambling of the Financial sector, the lending practices for the Mortgage industry (u mean they didn't lobby for less regulation?)
Are you kidding me? Talking about twisting facts. The Housing bubble created by the Fed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
That's right, the Hedge Funds, the Casino types of gambling of the Financial sector, the lending practices for the Mortgage industry (u mean they didn't lobby for less regulation?)
Who knew they were going to get bailed out by the feds if they got in trouble. We call that moral hazard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lutz3toe
Are you kidding me? Talking about twisting facts. The Housing bubble created by the Fed?
No. Yes.
And I forgot to mention all of those so called Mortage derivatives types of investments that area allowed. Where they can bundle all of these bad mortgages together and dump em into the market.
And please don't tell us this is not due to Deregulation!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Yes. Of course it was. Minimally it was started from the Fed created housing bubble. But there were other interventions and distortions as well. Not the least of which is the crisis prolonging "stimulus" and bailouts.
OK. Then a question. Do you see the proposal of forcing investment banking and savings banking to be separate a bad regulatory tactic or a good one? Actually I'm pretty sure of your answer, but if it is as I suspect, I'll stop here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen
OK. Then a question. Do you see the proposal of forcing investment banking and savings banking to be separate a bad regulatory tactic or a good one?
Bad*. Why?
Do you think it is a good one? If so, why?
*I think the entire government-protected banking cartel needs to be freed first though.
Nope. You are wrong. I pay taxes every year and I use the standard deductions. I don't use any loopholes whatsoever. I don't turn in my charitable donations as a tax deduction. I didn't request the deduction for my hybrid back in '04. Please don't claim everyone would do the same thing. Many people are not greedy people who feel they find a way to keep every buck. I live a basic (low middle class) life and don't feel the "need" to fill my life with as many $$$ as I can make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing
I use the standard deductions. I don't use any loopholes whatsoever.
Toe-may-toe...toe-mah-toe.
"Loophole" is the code word for "standard deduction" that someone doesn't like or think is fair.
. . .
[ Scaife is not alone among billionaires flushing money down such news operations. As my friend and colleague Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks pointed out in a Daily Kos diary in July 2009, billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million per year on the New York Post, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million per year on the Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on the Washington Times.5
So why are these guys willing to lose so much money funding conservative media? Why do they bulk-buy every right-wing book that comes out to push it to the top of the bestseller list and then give away the copies to “subscribers” to their Web sites and publications? Why do they fund to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars per year right-wing think tanks and training programs and lobbying organizations?
The answer is pretty straightforward: they do it because it buys them respectability and gets their con job out there. And one of their most important goals is lower taxes—for millionaires and billionaires like themselves.
Scaife, for instance, has used the various family foundations he oversees to fund conservative causes over the years to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, including more than $20 million to just the Heritage Foundation. All you have to do to see how influential Heritage has been is to read its own propaganda. When President Reagan took office in 1981, Heritage dropped a 1,100-page tome titled Mandate for Leadership on his desk, which he promptly handed out to his entire cabinet. Among its achievements over the years, Heritage lists this under 1981: ] —Thom Hartmann