Get E-Mail Updates

God's Politics Blog

The Notorious I.B.G.

by Elizabeth Palmberg 09-15-2009 | 2:00pm
Print
22 Comments | Login or Register to post comments

The New York Times pointed out, last Friday, that while the stopgap effort to stop last fall's financial crisis did work, efforts to make the obviously-needed fixes to avoid the next crisis have not gone anywhere yet. The problem with "too big to fail" banks is that they encourage disastrous risk-taking, because bankers and investors are allowed to reap windfall profits when their risky speculations go well, but the taxpayer steps in to bail them out when the bets go badly:

In the days that followed [last fall's financial crisis], nearly everyone seemed to agree that Wall Street was due for fundamental change. Its "heads I win, tails I'm bailed out" model could not continue. Its eight-figure paydays would end.

In fact, though

22 Comments | Login or Register to post comments
Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Related Stories

Resources

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

by: pawheel

09-16-2009 @ 10:21am

I saw part of a speech that Obama gave to the heads of the Fed and Wall St a couple of days ago. He warned them that things are going to change through regulation, and they should start to work toward the rules he outlined before it gets forced on them. His statements about what will be done were what is right for the country, NOT for the financial industries pockets.
However, I think Obama was unfortunately just proving Joe Wilson's point.

Why is this difficult? Just undo the regulatory damage done by Phil Graham and others in the late 90s and put the Glass Stegall act back in place. It kept us from financial meltdown for 60 years, until deregulation was allowed to remove it.

by: natcoz

09-16-2009 @ 9:03pm

The correlation you draw between Jesus' challenge to take care of the poor and the boom-bust cycles is excellent.

We DO need to care for the poor, but caring for the poor involves much more than just charitable giving. And in many cases, caring for the poor is the opposite of demanding that our gov't take care of them.

We're failing to care for the poor when we allow corporations to lobby gov't to create laws that bail them out when their speculations don't pan out so well. Our toleration of the 16th amendment is a failure to care for the poor. Virtually everything we see going wrong with our country's economy is something that hurts the poor before hurting anyone else.

The first step, or certainly an important step, in caring for the poor is to keep our gov't in check. And this is something we aren't doing so well at. I say our first step is to repeal the 16th amendment and put things back the way they were.

http://mises.org/story/3711

by: bhaack

09-17-2009 @ 12:17am

Economics is easily one of the most complex academic subjects there is. I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject.

What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

by: natcoz

09-16-2009 @ 9:03pm

The correlation you draw between Jesus' challenge to take care of the poor and the boom-bust cycles is excellent.

We DO need to care for the poor, but caring for the poor involves much more than just charitable giving. And in many cases, caring for the poor is the opposite of demanding that our gov't take care of them.

We're failing to care for the poor when we allow corporations to lobby gov't to create laws that bail them out when their speculations don't pan out so well. Our toleration of the 16th amendment is a failure to care for the poor. Virtually everything we see going wrong with our country's economy is something that hurts the poor before hurting anyone else.

The first step, or certainly an important step, in caring for the poor is to keep our gov't in check. And this is something we aren't doing so well at. I say our first step is to repeal the 16th amendment and put things back the way they were.

http://mises.org/story/3711

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 11:19am

Bhaack:
"I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject."

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject. The fact that the economics "experts" with "training"have made some things so overly complicated that only they understand it so they have to stay in their top level Wall St. and Federal Reserve jobs even though they caused the crash points out clearly that it needs to be dumbed down some.

"What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts? I gave an opinion based on 51 years of life, seeing economic bubbles and crashes over and over that were manipulated by the "experts" while only the non experts suffered the long term damage and the experts ran off with the short term gain. Economics is everybodys business, this forum is available to all, not just to people who are at least as trained as you or more.
As I see my wife only part time employed since last September and my son back home because his employment in his field is cut drastically due to last years economic crash, I find myself less and less interested in the opinions of the trained ecdonomics professionals. I doubt that I am alone in this. Seems to me that 30 or 40,000 teabaggers expressed similar opinions in Washington DC on 9/12 of this year. Some of them may be misguided or easily lead, but some of their opinions are valid too, even if they aren't formally trained on the subject. Sometimes lifes lesson are as valuable as education, in fact they ARE education if you pay enough attention.

by: bhaack

09-17-2009 @ 12:17am

Economics is easily one of the most complex academic subjects there is. I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject.

What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 11:19am

Bhaack:
"I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject."

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject. The fact that the economics "experts" with "training"have made some things so overly complicated that only they understand it so they have to stay in their top level Wall St. and Federal Reserve jobs even though they caused the crash points out clearly that it needs to be dumbed down some.

"What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts? I gave an opinion based on 51 years of life, seeing economic bubbles and crashes over and over that were manipulated by the "experts" while only the non experts suffered the long term damage and the experts ran off with the short term gain. Economics is everybodys business, this forum is available to all, not just to people who are at least as trained as you or more.
As I see my wife only part time employed since last September and my son back home because his employment in his field is cut drastically due to last years economic crash, I find myself less and less interested in the opinions of the trained ecdonomics professionals. I doubt that I am alone in this. Seems to me that 30 or 40,000 teabaggers expressed similar opinions in Washington DC on 9/12 of this year. Some of them may be misguided or easily lead, but some of their opinions are valid too, even if they aren't formally trained on the subject. Sometimes lifes lesson are as valuable as education, in fact they ARE education if you pay enough attention.

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 1:20pm

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: xfree9

09-17-2009 @ 6:28pm

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject.

While I agree with you that you don't have to be educated or "trained" in economics to have valuable input, that line of reasoning doesn't make any sense. We are all effected by many things of which we are unable to speak responsibly to. The moonlight affects us at night. Sunshine affects us. Climate change affects us, but that doesn't qualify all of us to say something valuable.

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 6:32pm

we have left the economics to the experts, and look where it left us :)

by: xfree9

09-17-2009 @ 6:28pm

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject.

While I agree with you that you don't have to be educated or "trained" in economics to have valuable input, that line of reasoning doesn't make any sense. We are all effected by many things of which we are unable to speak responsibly to. The moonlight affects us at night. Sunshine affects us. Climate change affects us, but that doesn't qualify all of us to say something valuable.

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 11:20am

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 6:32pm

we have left the economics to the experts, and look where it left us :)

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 11:20am

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 1:20pm

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: xfree9

09-15-2009 @ 4:55pm

We need decent financial reform, now.

I couldn't agree more. Yet banker's salaries and bailouts are the symptoms of the problems, not the source. The source can be found by loose monetary policy and inflationary activity on behalf of the Federal Reserve Bank. The "heads I win..." attitude is very obviously reflected by such a central bank's existence for the purpose of bailouts and "lender of last resort" with regards to excessive risk-taking.

Wouldn't a better solution be to have a natural regulator (gold as a monetary standard), when banks are forced to do what every small business and most large businesses are forced to do: compete on their own merits? Wouldn't a more common sense solution be to not have fractional reserve banking, whereby bankers can lend deposits in excess of 10x the amount of present funds, then use the re-deposits as a basis for more and more lending? Such fraud is common practice (and legal), yet we're suddenly shocked by all the consequences because we don't attack the source of the problem.

As Brian McLaren has said, "It doesn't matter how good your answers are if you're not asking the right questions." Symptoms are great to address, but if you're sitting on a nail, you don't attack the problem by staying seated and taking lots of pain killer.

by: DJ9791

09-15-2009 @ 4:56pm

Why should we be surprised by such attitudes? They permeate our society at every level. Government, corporations, the media, entertainment, even religion

Until we embrace the idea that less is more and that the good of all should be served instead of the good of a few, our world will continue to swing from boom-to-bust, with bust cycles never ending for the poor.

Jesus challenged us to take care of the poor, the distressed, the stranger and the orphan. He did NOT endorse accumulation of wealth at the expense of our fellow-man. Those who subscribe to the theory "He who dies with the most toys wins" will one day face our Creator...and things won't be pretty!

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: letjusticerolldown

09-16-2009 @ 2:03am

I dunno.................wish I understood enough to know what is needed. My gut tells me we are lookin at a drunk climbing out of the gutter, having scaped together enough change to stumble off to the liquor store. The only law around is the policeman guarding the liquor store against robbery. The alcohol flows--unabated.

I do know Sojo has put up many intelligent posts about the financial meltdown. But there is a difference between intelligence and knowledge and wisdom.

by: xfree9

09-15-2009 @ 4:55pm

We need decent financial reform, now.

I couldn't agree more. Yet banker's salaries and bailouts are the symptoms of the problems, not the source. The source can be found by loose monetary policy and inflationary activity on behalf of the Federal Reserve Bank. The "heads I win..." attitude is very obviously reflected by such a central bank's existence for the purpose of bailouts and "lender of last resort" with regards to excessive risk-taking.

Wouldn't a better solution be to have a natural regulator (gold as a monetary standard), when banks are forced to do what every small business and most large businesses are forced to do: compete on their own merits? Wouldn't a more common sense solution be to not have fractional reserve banking, whereby bankers can lend deposits in excess of 10x the amount of present funds, then use the re-deposits as a basis for more and more lending? Such fraud is common practice (and legal), yet we're suddenly shocked by all the consequences because we don't attack the source of the problem.

As Brian McLaren has said, "It doesn't matter how good your answers are if you're not asking the right questions." Symptoms are great to address, but if you're sitting on a nail, you don't attack the problem by staying seated and taking lots of pain killer.

by: DJ9791

09-15-2009 @ 4:56pm

Why should we be surprised by such attitudes? They permeate our society at every level. Government, corporations, the media, entertainment, even religion

Until we embrace the idea that less is more and that the good of all should be served instead of the good of a few, our world will continue to swing from boom-to-bust, with bust cycles never ending for the poor.

Jesus challenged us to take care of the poor, the distressed, the stranger and the orphan. He did NOT endorse accumulation of wealth at the expense of our fellow-man. Those who subscribe to the theory "He who dies with the most toys wins" will one day face our Creator...and things won't be pretty!

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: pawheel

09-16-2009 @ 10:21am

I saw part of a speech that Obama gave to the heads of the Fed and Wall St a couple of days ago. He warned them that things are going to change through regulation, and they should start to work toward the rules he outlined before it gets forced on them. His statements about what will be done were what is right for the country, NOT for the financial industries pockets.
However, I think Obama was unfortunately just proving Joe Wilson's point.

Why is this difficult? Just undo the regulatory damage done by Phil Graham and others in the late 90s and put the Glass Stegall act back in place. It kept us from financial meltdown for 60 years, until deregulation was allowed to remove it.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-16-2009 @ 2:03am

I dunno.................wish I understood enough to know what is needed. My gut tells me we are lookin at a drunk climbing out of the gutter, having scaped together enough change to stumble off to the liquor store. The only law around is the policeman guarding the liquor store against robbery. The alcohol flows--unabated.

I do know Sojo has put up many intelligent posts about the financial meltdown. But there is a difference between intelligence and knowledge and wisdom.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: xfree9

09-15-2009 @ 4:55pm

We need decent financial reform, now.

I couldn't agree more. Yet banker's salaries and bailouts are the symptoms of the problems, not the source. The source can be found by loose monetary policy and inflationary activity on behalf of the Federal Reserve Bank. The "heads I win..." attitude is very obviously reflected by such a central bank's existence for the purpose of bailouts and "lender of last resort" with regards to excessive risk-taking.

Wouldn't a better solution be to have a natural regulator (gold as a monetary standard), when banks are forced to do what every small business and most large businesses are forced to do: compete on their own merits? Wouldn't a more common sense solution be to not have fractional reserve banking, whereby bankers can lend deposits in excess of 10x the amount of present funds, then use the re-deposits as a basis for more and more lending? Such fraud is common practice (and legal), yet we're suddenly shocked by all the consequences because we don't attack the source of the problem.

As Brian McLaren has said, "It doesn't matter how good your answers are if you're not asking the right questions." Symptoms are great to address, but if you're sitting on a nail, you don't attack the problem by staying seated and taking lots of pain killer.

by: xfree9

09-15-2009 @ 4:55pm

We need decent financial reform, now.

I couldn't agree more. Yet banker's salaries and bailouts are the symptoms of the problems, not the source. The source can be found by loose monetary policy and inflationary activity on behalf of the Federal Reserve Bank. The "heads I win..." attitude is very obviously reflected by such a central bank's existence for the purpose of bailouts and "lender of last resort" with regards to excessive risk-taking.

Wouldn't a better solution be to have a natural regulator (gold as a monetary standard), when banks are forced to do what every small business and most large businesses are forced to do: compete on their own merits? Wouldn't a more common sense solution be to not have fractional reserve banking, whereby bankers can lend deposits in excess of 10x the amount of present funds, then use the re-deposits as a basis for more and more lending? Such fraud is common practice (and legal), yet we're suddenly shocked by all the consequences because we don't attack the source of the problem.

As Brian McLaren has said, "It doesn't matter how good your answers are if you're not asking the right questions." Symptoms are great to address, but if you're sitting on a nail, you don't attack the problem by staying seated and taking lots of pain killer.

by: DJ9791

09-15-2009 @ 4:56pm

Why should we be surprised by such attitudes? They permeate our society at every level. Government, corporations, the media, entertainment, even religion

Until we embrace the idea that less is more and that the good of all should be served instead of the good of a few, our world will continue to swing from boom-to-bust, with bust cycles never ending for the poor.

Jesus challenged us to take care of the poor, the distressed, the stranger and the orphan. He did NOT endorse accumulation of wealth at the expense of our fellow-man. Those who subscribe to the theory "He who dies with the most toys wins" will one day face our Creator...and things won't be pretty!

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: DJ9791

09-15-2009 @ 4:56pm

Why should we be surprised by such attitudes? They permeate our society at every level. Government, corporations, the media, entertainment, even religion

Until we embrace the idea that less is more and that the good of all should be served instead of the good of a few, our world will continue to swing from boom-to-bust, with bust cycles never ending for the poor.

Jesus challenged us to take care of the poor, the distressed, the stranger and the orphan. He did NOT endorse accumulation of wealth at the expense of our fellow-man. Those who subscribe to the theory "He who dies with the most toys wins" will one day face our Creator...and things won't be pretty!

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: letjusticerolldown

09-16-2009 @ 2:03am

I dunno.................wish I understood enough to know what is needed. My gut tells me we are lookin at a drunk climbing out of the gutter, having scaped together enough change to stumble off to the liquor store. The only law around is the policeman guarding the liquor store against robbery. The alcohol flows--unabated.

I do know Sojo has put up many intelligent posts about the financial meltdown. But there is a difference between intelligence and knowledge and wisdom.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-16-2009 @ 2:03am

I dunno.................wish I understood enough to know what is needed. My gut tells me we are lookin at a drunk climbing out of the gutter, having scaped together enough change to stumble off to the liquor store. The only law around is the policeman guarding the liquor store against robbery. The alcohol flows--unabated.

I do know Sojo has put up many intelligent posts about the financial meltdown. But there is a difference between intelligence and knowledge and wisdom.

by: pawheel

09-16-2009 @ 10:21am

I saw part of a speech that Obama gave to the heads of the Fed and Wall St a couple of days ago. He warned them that things are going to change through regulation, and they should start to work toward the rules he outlined before it gets forced on them. His statements about what will be done were what is right for the country, NOT for the financial industries pockets.
However, I think Obama was unfortunately just proving Joe Wilson's point.

Why is this difficult? Just undo the regulatory damage done by Phil Graham and others in the late 90s and put the Glass Stegall act back in place. It kept us from financial meltdown for 60 years, until deregulation was allowed to remove it.

by: pawheel

09-16-2009 @ 10:21am

I saw part of a speech that Obama gave to the heads of the Fed and Wall St a couple of days ago. He warned them that things are going to change through regulation, and they should start to work toward the rules he outlined before it gets forced on them. His statements about what will be done were what is right for the country, NOT for the financial industries pockets.
However, I think Obama was unfortunately just proving Joe Wilson's point.

Why is this difficult? Just undo the regulatory damage done by Phil Graham and others in the late 90s and put the Glass Stegall act back in place. It kept us from financial meltdown for 60 years, until deregulation was allowed to remove it.

by: natcoz

09-16-2009 @ 9:03pm

The correlation you draw between Jesus' challenge to take care of the poor and the boom-bust cycles is excellent.

We DO need to care for the poor, but caring for the poor involves much more than just charitable giving. And in many cases, caring for the poor is the opposite of demanding that our gov't take care of them.

We're failing to care for the poor when we allow corporations to lobby gov't to create laws that bail them out when their speculations don't pan out so well. Our toleration of the 16th amendment is a failure to care for the poor. Virtually everything we see going wrong with our country's economy is something that hurts the poor before hurting anyone else.

The first step, or certainly an important step, in caring for the poor is to keep our gov't in check. And this is something we aren't doing so well at. I say our first step is to repeal the 16th amendment and put things back the way they were.

http://mises.org/story/3711

by: natcoz

09-16-2009 @ 9:03pm

The correlation you draw between Jesus' challenge to take care of the poor and the boom-bust cycles is excellent.

We DO need to care for the poor, but caring for the poor involves much more than just charitable giving. And in many cases, caring for the poor is the opposite of demanding that our gov't take care of them.

We're failing to care for the poor when we allow corporations to lobby gov't to create laws that bail them out when their speculations don't pan out so well. Our toleration of the 16th amendment is a failure to care for the poor. Virtually everything we see going wrong with our country's economy is something that hurts the poor before hurting anyone else.

The first step, or certainly an important step, in caring for the poor is to keep our gov't in check. And this is something we aren't doing so well at. I say our first step is to repeal the 16th amendment and put things back the way they were.

http://mises.org/story/3711

by: bhaack

09-17-2009 @ 12:17am

Economics is easily one of the most complex academic subjects there is. I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject.

What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

by: bhaack

09-17-2009 @ 12:17am

Economics is easily one of the most complex academic subjects there is. I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject.

What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 11:19am

Bhaack:
"I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject."

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject. The fact that the economics "experts" with "training"have made some things so overly complicated that only they understand it so they have to stay in their top level Wall St. and Federal Reserve jobs even though they caused the crash points out clearly that it needs to be dumbed down some.

"What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts? I gave an opinion based on 51 years of life, seeing economic bubbles and crashes over and over that were manipulated by the "experts" while only the non experts suffered the long term damage and the experts ran off with the short term gain. Economics is everybodys business, this forum is available to all, not just to people who are at least as trained as you or more.
As I see my wife only part time employed since last September and my son back home because his employment in his field is cut drastically due to last years economic crash, I find myself less and less interested in the opinions of the trained ecdonomics professionals. I doubt that I am alone in this. Seems to me that 30 or 40,000 teabaggers expressed similar opinions in Washington DC on 9/12 of this year. Some of them may be misguided or easily lead, but some of their opinions are valid too, even if they aren't formally trained on the subject. Sometimes lifes lesson are as valuable as education, in fact they ARE education if you pay enough attention.

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 11:19am

Bhaack:
"I am always amused that people with little or no formal training in the subject feel qualified to speak on the subject."

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject. The fact that the economics "experts" with "training"have made some things so overly complicated that only they understand it so they have to stay in their top level Wall St. and Federal Reserve jobs even though they caused the crash points out clearly that it needs to be dumbed down some.

"What is worse is when someone starts with their 'analysis' with the words: "Why is this difficult?"

When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts? I gave an opinion based on 51 years of life, seeing economic bubbles and crashes over and over that were manipulated by the "experts" while only the non experts suffered the long term damage and the experts ran off with the short term gain. Economics is everybodys business, this forum is available to all, not just to people who are at least as trained as you or more.
As I see my wife only part time employed since last September and my son back home because his employment in his field is cut drastically due to last years economic crash, I find myself less and less interested in the opinions of the trained ecdonomics professionals. I doubt that I am alone in this. Seems to me that 30 or 40,000 teabaggers expressed similar opinions in Washington DC on 9/12 of this year. Some of them may be misguided or easily lead, but some of their opinions are valid too, even if they aren't formally trained on the subject. Sometimes lifes lesson are as valuable as education, in fact they ARE education if you pay enough attention.

by: xfree9

09-17-2009 @ 6:28pm

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject.

While I agree with you that you don't have to be educated or "trained" in economics to have valuable input, that line of reasoning doesn't make any sense. We are all effected by many things of which we are unable to speak responsibly to. The moonlight affects us at night. Sunshine affects us. Climate change affects us, but that doesn't qualify all of us to say something valuable.

by: xfree9

09-17-2009 @ 6:28pm

EVERYONE is effected by economics. That allows everyone to speak on the subject.

While I agree with you that you don't have to be educated or "trained" in economics to have valuable input, that line of reasoning doesn't make any sense. We are all effected by many things of which we are unable to speak responsibly to. The moonlight affects us at night. Sunshine affects us. Climate change affects us, but that doesn't qualify all of us to say something valuable.

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 6:32pm

we have left the economics to the experts, and look where it left us :)

by: pawheel

09-17-2009 @ 6:32pm

we have left the economics to the experts, and look where it left us :)

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 11:20am

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 11:20am

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 1:20pm

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.

by: pawheel

09-18-2009 @ 1:20pm

Xfree9,

2 things: first, I do agree with your statement at the beginning of this discussion. Creating money, or value out of nothing (no gold or other standard to back it up) is a recipe for failure, especially when combined with deregulation.
Second, I have to refer back to my previous statement: When did this become a discussion forum only for the experts?
I spent the last few decades not getting my finances involved in overly risky ways, have never owned a credit card because in my opinion if I can't afford it this month, I can't afford it next month with interest piled on, I would never vote for anyone supporting deregulation, and my retirement account is 90% conservative .I do not feel in any way responsible for the current crisis, but have to pay the price anyway. I feel that gives me a right to give an opinion.
This is not Wikipedia, opinions are as welcome as factual information.