Ron Paul Questions Bernanke.....Again.
- Thread starter Collapse
- Start date
What needs to be done is the Government to step away, they are the problem with the Free Market. The Free Market is not the problem, nor is Capitalism.
The government needs to let these companies go bankrupt so they can be bought by someone that knows what the hell they're doing. Sure there will be unemployment but the new management will hire these people back. We need to solve this problem not make it worse.
All this money that was created has created so much inflation that there is no way to avoid it. Stagflation is going to kick it. Shit is going to be bad for a while.
The reason we are in deflation is because the companies are liquidating their assets. Once this is done inflation will happen. It has to happen.
The government needs to let these companies go bankrupt so they can be bought by someone that knows what the hell they're doing. Sure there will be unemployment but the new management will hire these people back. We need to solve this problem not make it worse.
All this money that was created has created so much inflation that there is no way to avoid it. Stagflation is going to kick it. Shit is going to be bad for a while.
The reason we are in deflation is because the companies are liquidating their assets. Once this is done inflation will happen. It has to happen.
Again, you spout nothing of substance, and only talking points and catchphrases. Do you have another string I can pull to get a different awnser, or are you one of these simple pull string 1 trick, 3 awnser pony?
Do you understand the repercussion's it has on workers benefits, health care, pension, wages, ect. when you let a company go bankrupt? In a free market, guess who pays for it (I'll give you a hint, it ain't the CEO's and executives).
Please, do us all a favor and quit talkin' econmics around here like you know something, b/c you can't specifically answer one of about 15 questions I proposed, but only responded with the same headlines. You ignorance on the subject and lack of true understanding shines brighter and brighter with every post.
Do you understand the repercussion's it has on workers benefits, health care, pension, wages, ect. when you let a company go bankrupt? In a free market, guess who pays for it (I'll give you a hint, it ain't the CEO's and executives).
Please, do us all a favor and quit talkin' econmics around here like you know something, b/c you can't specifically answer one of about 15 questions I proposed, but only responded with the same headlines. You ignorance on the subject and lack of true understanding shines brighter and brighter with every post.
If you mean that the working class pays for themselves, then I agree.
If a company went bankrupt in a freemarket, then it would cease to exist along with any health care benefits, pensions, etc. No one would pay to reimburse those funds, and those who had interests in them would be on there own to recoup.
LMAO!!
Since he did it in a market that is NOT deregulated OR free, apparently it could happen in another market!!
I think as it seems you believe Madoff did this in a deregulated free market, you are the one that "really doesn't know shit about finance end of story, period, point blank' lol
What Maddof did was the perfect example of; there is no free lunch on Wall St; do your own DD; and if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
I don't support a completely deregulated free market because humans have inherently destructive tendencies, but if you think things like this wouldn't happen in a highly regulated market, you are fooling yourself.
Corruption follows people, not markets.
The zoning of land in cities is highly regulated by the government and how often do we hear about rezoning abuses/negligence etc? The disposal of Nuclear waste is highly regulated and that doesn't exactly have a stellar report card either.
Since he did it in a market that is NOT deregulated OR free, apparently it could happen in another market!!
I think as it seems you believe Madoff did this in a deregulated free market, you are the one that "really doesn't know shit about finance end of story, period, point blank' lol
What Maddof did was the perfect example of; there is no free lunch on Wall St; do your own DD; and if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
I don't support a completely deregulated free market because humans have inherently destructive tendencies, but if you think things like this wouldn't happen in a highly regulated market, you are fooling yourself.
Corruption follows people, not markets.
The zoning of land in cities is highly regulated by the government and how often do we hear about rezoning abuses/negligence etc? The disposal of Nuclear waste is highly regulated and that doesn't exactly have a stellar report card either.
If this was regulated the SEC would have done something 9yrs ago when redflags were first being raised.
How do you know or not know what kind of due diligence was done or not? Does it matter when you make up a fraud accounting company and b.s. prospectus in the 1st place.
get the fuck outta here with that dumbshit.
And people run markets, thus by your assumetion markets are corrupt.
Regarding nuclear waste, yes that needs more regulation as well. Keep in mind the next step beyond regulation is implementation, with a reward/penalty system that is enforced.
I don't hear any idea's, just ideology from any freemarketers.
How do you know or not know what kind of due diligence was done or not? Does it matter when you make up a fraud accounting company and b.s. prospectus in the 1st place.
get the fuck outta here with that dumbshit.
And people run markets, thus by your assumetion markets are corrupt.
Regarding nuclear waste, yes that needs more regulation as well. Keep in mind the next step beyond regulation is implementation, with a reward/penalty system that is enforced.
I don't hear any idea's, just ideology from any freemarketers.
OK, maybe you missed this the first time around. You suggested that, and this is a direct quote from you, "and such a scandal could only happen in a 'deregulated free market'."
Our market IS regulated, and this happened.
Do you what the purpose of the SEC is?.... REGULATION.
How can we be operating in a deregulated free market and one in which the SEC (which primary function is regulation) exists??
Regulations are not the problem, it is the people behind the regulations
The SEC was aware of this and did nothing. Regulations were in place and they did not prevent this, why should they so in the future?
S.E.C. Says It Missed Signals on Madoff Fraud Case
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/17/business/17madoff.html?ref=business
The problem was not in the lack regulations, it was with the people enforcing the regulations. We can regulate the regulations, but if the people upholding the regulations aren't doing their job then the whole system is about as worthwhile as square tire.
Considering many different people had looked into investing with Maddof and concluded through their own DD that he was most likely running a ponzi scheme long before this came to light, it is safe to say that it was not impossible to determine that.
Good supporting case for your argument! Lol
Markets are not corrupt because they don't have the capacity to be corrupt.
My assumption is people have tendencies towards corruptness, people enforce regulations, therefore regulations will be exposed to that corruptness, and adding more regulations will not eliminate that reality. Making more regulations doesn't take away the possibility for corruption or abuse because wherever human influence is involved corruption/abuse is possible, but it does negatively impact the market by attempting to artificially influence the natural cycles that it will inevitably go through.
We need some regulations, but throwing more regulations at every "problem" will not solve them because many of the "problems" in our markets are a natural part of our market, which will occur regardless of the degree of regulation in them.
I said in my previous post that I don't support a freemarket economy. IMO regulations should be concerned with general broad issues such as environmental protection, not trying to control an otherwise uncontrollable market or protecting investors who should have done a better job protecting themselves.
Our market IS regulated, and this happened.
Do you what the purpose of the SEC is?.... REGULATION.
How can we be operating in a deregulated free market and one in which the SEC (which primary function is regulation) exists??
Regulations are not the problem, it is the people behind the regulations
The SEC was aware of this and did nothing. Regulations were in place and they did not prevent this, why should they so in the future?
S.E.C. Says It Missed Signals on Madoff Fraud Case
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/17/business/17madoff.html?ref=business
The problem was not in the lack regulations, it was with the people enforcing the regulations. We can regulate the regulations, but if the people upholding the regulations aren't doing their job then the whole system is about as worthwhile as square tire.
Considering many different people had looked into investing with Maddof and concluded through their own DD that he was most likely running a ponzi scheme long before this came to light, it is safe to say that it was not impossible to determine that.
Good supporting case for your argument! Lol
Markets are not corrupt because they don't have the capacity to be corrupt.
My assumption is people have tendencies towards corruptness, people enforce regulations, therefore regulations will be exposed to that corruptness, and adding more regulations will not eliminate that reality. Making more regulations doesn't take away the possibility for corruption or abuse because wherever human influence is involved corruption/abuse is possible, but it does negatively impact the market by attempting to artificially influence the natural cycles that it will inevitably go through.
We need some regulations, but throwing more regulations at every "problem" will not solve them because many of the "problems" in our markets are a natural part of our market, which will occur regardless of the degree of regulation in them.
I said in my previous post that I don't support a freemarket economy. IMO regulations should be concerned with general broad issues such as environmental protection, not trying to control an otherwise uncontrollable market or protecting investors who should have done a better job protecting themselves.