The O-Administration is wrong.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Well I am sorry but I got kind of bored with the rhetoric. It's always the same .. if the government sits back and does nothing it's complacent...if it acts in the manner it believes to be to the common good.. it is wasting resources.

Personally this financial nightmare has been a good few years in the making. Everyone was making a fast buck. All was rosy in the garden and we were all living on credit based on shaky assets. The wall street traders like the other traders worldwide were talking up stock.. values were rising and these traders were very comfortable with their huge bonuses based on the con. The huge con that we all bought into. The con that asset A was worth X amount, we truly did not believe these values but whilst our bonuses were flowing and pensions rising it was comfortable to say the least. No one wanted to tell the truth, or for that matter believe it.

Sooner or later the bubble was bound to burst and when it did there was a panic to return this cosy world back to the status quo. We don't like the pain. Not being able to eat out on a regular basis and purchase that new car was alien to us and no that's not what we want. We like living in this never never land, this world of phoney credit and values.

Now if we want real values and real worth of our money we have to have the pain and lots of it. But we in the West are soft, have had it real easy and this is not what we want. Thus we have a president and world leaders doing whatever they can to restore faith in the banking system (which has been extremely guilty of this fraud) to bring us back to our old ways. Back to that comfortable CON, no matter the cost to future generations. Let them have the pain, we like the luxury of living beyond our means, on credit up the ying yang.

Enough I am getting boring. But it's a cycle that will relive itself over and over again until we get a true sense of value and honesty in the system. It will never happen...it's too painful

Arthur

This may be the most sensible reply in this thread.

[mRx 16]

Well I am sorry but I got kind of bored with the rhetoric. It's always the same .. if the government sits back and does nothing it's complacent...if it acts in the manner it believes to be to the common good.. it is wasting resources.

Personally this financial nightmare has been a good few years in the making. Everyone was making a fast buck. All was rosy in the garden and we were all living on credit based on shaky assets. The wall street traders like the other traders worldwide were talking up stock.. values were rising and these traders were very comfortable with their huge bonuses based on the con. The huge con that we all bought into. The con that asset A was worth X amount, we truly did not believe these values but whilst our bonuses were flowing and pensions rising it was comfortable to say the least. No one wanted to tell the truth, or for that matter believe it.

Sooner or later the bubble was bound to burst and when it did there was a panic to return this cosy world back to the status quo. We don't like the pain. Not being able to eat out on a regular basis and purchase that new car was alien to us and no that's not what we want. We like living in this never never land, this world of phoney credit and values.

Now if we want real values and real worth of our money we have to have the pain and lots of it. But we in the West are soft, have had it real easy and this is not what we want. Thus we have a president and world leaders doing whatever they can to restore faith in the banking system (which has been extremely guilty of this fraud) to bring us back to our old ways. Back to that comfortable CON, no matter the cost to future generations. Let them have the pain, we like the luxury of living beyond our means, on credit up the ying yang.

Enough I am getting boring. But it's a cycle that will relive itself over and over again until we get a true sense of value and honesty in the system. It will never happen...it's too painful

Arthur

Bubbles are phenomena caused by monetary inflation. The banking sector cannot create fake credit unless enticed to do so by the Federal Reserve's manipulation of the discount rate. So the banking sector is not the source of the bubble.

So the con game you mention... well, you can thank the good government for that.

If the government stays out of our economy, and focuses on the one role a government should have (protecting individual rights), then we can come out of this recession and start to generate the real wealth and value that you mention. It will be painful, but if the government keeps out, then it will be the last recession our economy will ever experience.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

If the government stays out of our economy, and focuses on the one role a government should have (protecting individual rights), then we can come out of this recession and start to generate the real wealth and value that you mention. It will be painful, but if the government keeps out, then it will be the last recession our economy will ever experience.

What of the common good, Matt? Can an individual not have liberty while also sharing in a common good?

[mRx 16]

If the government stays out of our economy, and focuses on the one role a government should have (protecting individual rights), then we can come out of this recession and start to generate the real wealth and value that you mention. It will be painful, but if the government keeps out, then it will be the last recession our economy will ever experience.

What of the common good, Matt? Can an individual not have liberty while also sharing in a common good?

The common good is an ambiguous concept enbraced by collectivists and Utilitarians, and is contradicting of liberty. So, no, liberty cannot exist when the rule of the majority is allowed to overpower the wills of the minority, which is basically what Democracy is.

Why can't common good arise from equal freedom and rights for all? Why must the prosperous and wealthy forfeit more of their earnings? Why must those with more children recieve more government gifts? Why is hetero-marriage rewarded with tax breaks? Equality is not synonymous with Democracy.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

If the government stays out of our economy, and focuses on the one role a government should have (protecting individual rights), then we can come out of this recession and start to generate the real wealth and value that you mention. It will be painful, but if the government keeps out, then it will be the last recession our economy will ever experience.

What of the common good, Matt? Can an individual not have liberty while also sharing in a common good?

The common good is an ambiguous concept enbraced by collectivists and Utilitarians, and is contradicting of liberty. So, no, liberty cannot exist when the rule of the majority is allowed to overpower the wills of the minority, which is basically what Democracy is.

Why can't common good arise from equal freedom and rights for all? Why must the prosperous and wealthy forfeit more of their earnings? Why must those with more children recieve more government gifts? Why is hetero-marriage rewarded with tax breaks? Equality is not synonymous with Democracy.

The common good can be found in all societies, Matt - regardless of ideologies. I don't know one single example of a society that thrived solely through liberty of the individual. Again, you're thinking in absolutes - to believe that the common good (needs of the many) can't coexist in harmony with individual liberty. It's not an easy marriage, but a necessary as well as natural relationship.

Edited February 28, 2009 by Mister Fancypants

[mRx 16]

If the government stays out of our economy, and focuses on the one role a government should have (protecting individual rights), then we can come out of this recession and start to generate the real wealth and value that you mention. It will be painful, but if the government keeps out, then it will be the last recession our economy will ever experience.

What of the common good, Matt? Can an individual not have liberty while also sharing in a common good?

The common good is an ambiguous concept enbraced by collectivists and Utilitarians, and is contradicting of liberty. So, no, liberty cannot exist when the rule of the majority is allowed to overpower the wills of the minority, which is basically what Democracy is.

Why can't common good arise from equal freedom and rights for all? Why must the prosperous and wealthy forfeit more of their earnings? Why must those with more children recieve more government gifts? Why is hetero-marriage rewarded with tax breaks? Equality is not synonymous with Democracy.

The common good can be found in all societies, Matt - regardless of ideologies. I don't know one single example of a society that thrived solely through liberty of the individual. Again, you're thinking in absolutes - to believe that the common good (needs of the many) can't coexist in harmony with individual liberty. It's not an easy marriage, but a necessary as well as natural relationship.

If you've read any of the Articles of Confederation, you can discern that we came very close to having a society based on individual liberty. It's too bad.

What is the necessity for a common good if everyone has freedom from violence or fraud against person or property? What could possibly be more of a common good than liberty?

I really don't see how I'm seeing in absolutes, Steve. The ideology of the common good is directly lockstep with the ideologies of Utilitarianism and Democracy, and the very definition of common good implies that it is not uniformly applicable to a society as a whole, therefore there will be some, the minority, who must make sacrifices in order that the majority may embrace their common good. Those sacrifices are of liberty and freedom.