Angmo

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

Our involvement in molding other countries to ways of our advantage and liking are as long as the history of the nation. I would like to say that it has not always been that way, however I simply cannot. Other countries, such as Great Britain, colonized the world for their benefit, not the benefit of those countries. Throughout world history, one empire raided others to expand their power, control and wealth. Death and suffering has always followed as part of it.

Unfortunately history always has a way of repeating itself again, again.....and again.

Worse than expanding an empire is the belief that one may be doing "God's Work". That killing all non-believers of that faith are the words of God himself and God is never questioned. As absolutely insane as that sounds today, those words some 2,000 years ago still ring to this day. A sane person may ask, "Why are we still doing this and perhaps it's time to rethink these writings?" Of course there are strong forces that have vested interests in keeping it all enforce.

It's as simple as that there once was a time that even the brightest scholars of their time believed that the world was flat and that the sun went around the earth. Over time science has proven it to be differently so just because the ancients believed it is no reason that we should continue to as well.

The world is now like the bait-cast reel that gets the bird nest backlash. It's simply a mess that would take time, patience and untold amount of resources to untangle.

Frosty Loc: Minnesota

Think outside of the box you are in.

Frosty Loc: Minnesota

Easy to say but nothing backing it up, therefore, a useless comment.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

You made the claim, I won’t shock you further by telling you that we aren’t operating within a capitalist system either.

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

Ever so true. Government involvement in any business sector is contrary to Capitalism. Government control of an industry disrupts the process and it creates winners and losers. Monopolies are considered to be a bad thing yet it is the very intervention into business that creates monopolies and protects them as well. A truly free market does not operate that way.

Capitalism is fundamentally based on the law of supply and demand. The local drug dealer on the corner understands how this works and the government has yet to figure it out.

Here's a few classic examples:

Solyndra received a $535 million U.S. Department of Energy loan guarantee, the first recipient of a loan guarantee under President Barack Obama's economic stimulus program, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. However, Solyndra officials used inaccurate information to mislead the Department of Energy in its application. While the overall loan program was in the black in 2014, it took a $528 million loss from Solyndra. Additionally, Solyndra received a $25.1 million tax break from California's Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority. Solyndra was not a unique case for the U.S. Department of Energy.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. was a global financial services firm. Before filing for bankruptcy in 2008, Lehman was the fourth-largest investment bank in the United States (behind Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Merrill Lynch), doing business in investment banking, equity and fixed-income sales and trading (especially U.S. Treasury securities), research, investment management, private equity, and private banking. Lehman was operational for 158 years from its founding in 1850 until 2008.

On September 15, 2008, the firm filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection following the exodus of most of its clients, drastic losses in its stock, and devaluation of assets by credit rating agencies, largely sparked by a loss of confidence, Lehman's involvement in the subprime mortgage crisis, and its exposure to less liquid assets caused by government introversion into the housing lending. Lehman's bankruptcy filing is the largest in US history, and is thought to have played a major role in the unfolding of the financial crisis of 2007–2008. The market collapse also gave support to the "Too big to fail" doctrine. The government let Lehman Brothers fail while providing taxpayer loans to their competitors such as Goldman Sachs which holds a large political presence and used a large portion of the federal bail out money to pay the executives obscene bonuses.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

Yep.

Our current system is closest to a soft fascism and has been since at least FDR.

Angmo

Frosty Loc: Minnesota

This is partially correct. Although there has never been “free markets”, if they did exist, they would soon create monopolies, like the game Monopoly.
Government also creates monopolies for the public good, such as power companies and sometimes garbage collection. These monopolies need to be highly regulated by the government or prices would sky rocket.

Also the economic crisis of 07and 08 was not caused by government interference but rather because of the lack of government oversight. Government had no means to regulate banks making poor loans, bundling them up and selling these loans to investment banks who in turn divided them up some more and sold them to retirement funds etc.

By the way, Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail by Secretary Hank Paulson who had worked for Goldman Sachs before going to work for government and didn’t like Lehman Brothers for some reason. He opposed out Lehman Brothers but favored bailing out the other investment banks.

Henry “Hank” Paulson

Then: US Treasury secretary
Now: chairman of University of Chicago’s Paulson Institute
As Lehman descended towards bankruptcy, Paulson was adamant the bank should not be rescued. Stung by criticism of the Treasury’s support for other failing financial companies, Paulson said he did not want to be seen as “Mr Bailout”.
Paulson, the former boss of Goldman Sachs, was already wealthy when he became a public servant.

trainspotter Loc: Oregon

Dilly...Dilly!

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

Thanks for expanding on the topic. What you stated about Goldman Sachs is quite true and "They have friends in high places" and their influence is much like a spiderweb running through many facets of the government.

To expand on this topic a bit more, In 1995 President Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. This act certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment and as it often said, "Shit flows down hill".

A problem is that Federal Bills, and Acts, are written by lawyers with vested interests of themselves and of the lawmakers. They are intentionally vague and complex with twists and turns that can be interpreted after they are passed in many ways. Worse, they then become administrated by a bureaucracy that can tighten and loosen them at their whim.

It's quite a sad state of affairs when it takes thousands of pages to write a Federal Bill although it would be difficult to hide undisclosed and unrelated tag-along passages otherwise. They are all a bunch of bastards.

fantom Loc: Colorado

Another uneducated and misinformed statement from the usual confused and bewildered lying source. I wonder if all coprophiliacs believe this.

Angmo