The Answer to the Energy & Economy Crisis

[brucefan]

How can anyone not agree with this??

Just blows my mind :think2:



The Answer to the Energy & Economy Crisis: More Entrepreneurship, Less Government!

Monday, July 14, 2008, 02:00 PM

Ask any American voter. The two biggest issues in this 2008 election are the economic crisis and the energy crisis. Seldom are there easy answers to such complex problems. But, not this time. The answer is simple- more entrepreneurship and less government!

That means deregulation and decontrol. It means lower taxes and more incentives for private investment. UNLEASH THE FREE MARKET. Government doesn't solve problems- government causes them. American entrepreneurs will solve our energy problem- if only government will get out of the way. And those same entrepreneurs and that same free market capitalism will put America on the road to solving our economic problems as well.

This energy crisis and the economic crisis go hand in hand (and to some extent, the terrorist crisis as well). America's oil purchases abroad account for almost half the U.S. trade deficit. Every dollar we spend on foreign oil is a dollar that could be better spent growing the U.S. economy. How do we find the money to buy all that oil? We borrow it from those same countries, many of whom hate us. What do they do with OUR money? They use it to fund terrorism!

So, how do we stop this vicious cycle? Simple- we get government out of the way. Please, do not get me wrong. There is one area in which I am in consensus with the environmentalists and the Democrats. There is no question that the only long term solution for America's energy independence is to wean ourselves off of fossil fuel (oil) and replace it with clean and renewable energy. The fact is, that process has been underway for years and I am in total agreement that it must be accelerated.

But, the reality is that it may take another 20-30 years to be accomplished. In the meantime, the answer is drill, drill, and drill some more. President Bush took a first step today by lifting the “Executive Ban” on offshore oil drilling. But that is only a small and symbolic start. Congress must throw out the government moratorium on energy exploration and production. Take the shackles off the oil and energy industries. Reduce the draconian bureaucracy that has not allowed the creation of a new oil refinery or nuclear power plant in over 30 years. Get government out of the way and let American ingenuity and entrepreneurship do what it has always done to make America the leading economic power in the world. Stop listening to liberal environmental extremists who want to drive America (by horse and buggy) back to the dark ages. They couldn't care less about the average working American. These radical environmentalists want to keep us all poor and beholden to them for handouts- that is how they buy your vote and keep themselves in power. It is time in my opinion to put the interests of Americans and the American economy FIRST.

Consider the Ethanol mess as “Exhibit A” for why government must get out of the way. Government bureaucrats and politicians always play “big shot” and try to pick winners versus losers. Why? To prove how important they are- to justify their big titles, big salaries and big egos. And, of course, to help a handful of friends and big industry insiders who just happen to contribute to their campaigns. But, what can you expect? They´re just about all lawyers (as well as career politicians), and when it comes to business it´s all lawyers know how to do- screw things it up! It is no coincidence when lawyers become politicians they act exactly the same way. But now, they get to do it with YOUR MONEY!

Take ethanol as an example. Government tried to solve the energy crisis by picking ethanol as the winner. Big mistake. Ethanol has not only done nothing to solve our energy crisis, it has caused a worldwide economic crisis. The corn crops now dedicated to ethanol production have produced a worldwide shortage of corn needed for food (as well as cattle/chicken feed). That has in turn spiked grocery prices, caused shortages at the grocery store, and incited riots across the globe. Yet gas prices continue to rise, because it actually takes more than a gallon of gas to create a gallon of ethanol. And, it turns out that ethanol causes more pollution than gas as well. The result is an energy and economic crisis caused by government.

Despite all this, the Presidential candidates from both major parties are still asleep at the wheel. They both talk change. But, the only “change” they bring to the table is more of the same tired big-government answers. Obama (the man with the most extreme liberal voting record out of 100 United States Senators) stands vehemently against drilling. He thinks government has the answer. He supports more of the same extreme environmental policies, heavy taxes, and big government regulation that got us to this crisis in the first place. John McCain is barely any better. He has just recently decided drilling is okay, but still refuses to allow any drilling in ANWR-- which potentially offers 10 billion (or more) barrels of oil to American consumers. Worse, McCain is a big believer in big-government solutions for global warming. His proposed energy policies will surely damage the American economy, cost millions of jobs, and raise our electric and gas bills dramatically. Make NO mistake- the election of either Obama or McCain will be a disaster for the American economy and consumers.

McCain's Republican Senate colleague John Warner proposes a big solution (drum roll please): lowering the national speed limit to 55 MPH. After 30+ years of inaction, the best Warner can come up with is more draconian federal government control over our lives and a violation of states' rights. It is safe to assume that neither Republicans nor Democrats offer a solution.

The answer is the free market, fiscally conservative principles of the Libertarian Party. We believe in putting American consumers and the American economy FIRST. These same common-sense principals that will work to solve the energy crisis, will also solve our Education and Health Care crisis'. It is this simple- Get government out of the way. Deregulate and decontrol free enterprise. Unleash American entrepreneurship and ingenuity. Encourage competition. Lower tax rates- individual, corporate, and capital gains to the lowest in the world. Then get out of the way. The greatest entrepreneurs in the world will lead this great nation to energy independence and the greatest economic boom in world history.
But first let's drill, drill and drill somemore. Build new oil refineries. Build new nuclear plants. Encourage oil shale exploration and gas to liquid production. Build new clean coal plants. Our country has one of the biggest deposits of coal on the planet earth. Find a way to burn coal without emitting hydrocarbons and we become one of the world's biggest energy EXPORTERS. We can beat the oil producing nations of the Middle East at their own game. We create millions of energy jobs. The trade deficit becomes a trade surplus.

The liberal mantra that removing government restrictions on drilling will not affect prices for 5 years is PURE BUNK! The day- yes the very day- that we truly deregulate and untie the hands of the energy entrepreneurs, oil prices around the world begin to drop dramatically. On that same day, the energy speculators and traders that are undoubtedly partially to blame for sky high gas prices, will have no choice but to sell their oil contracts with both fists. Look for this current “oil bubble” to end not just with a whimper- but a crash of epic proportions. And, this is a ¨crash¨ that every working American can cheer. It's time to let Libertarian free market ideas rule. It's time to elect a Libertarian Presidential ticket.

Mr. Root is a successful small businessman, entrepreneur, author, business speaker and commentator. He is currently the Vice Presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party on the Presidential ticket of Barr/Root.

For more on Wayne Root's views and commentaries go to: www.ROOTforAmerica.com or www.BobBarr2008.com

 

[RobFunk]

Wayne Root is great but I'm pretty sure he won't be on the ballot.

 

[Anonymous1]

Sorry, but the size of government, be it federal, state or local is not interested in an entreprenuer (sp) telling them what to do; they know better. That is why an equality in gevernment, i.e., dems/reps, works just fine by them, because it keeps most everything status quo, and little to no change suits them just fine and dandy. They are all getting along just fine and have nicely appointed retirements-from the scrub on up, they don't want you to interfere with their lives.

 

[jambolaya1]

Every person should do themselves a favor and try to think for themselves instead of letting other people do the thinking.

First point in that post is the most absurd and the dumbest idea ever advanced for american energy. If some one came to me and told me deregulation of the energy industry is some answer to our energy issues i would slap them in the face, shove my boot so far up their arse and tell them to deregulate that!!!!


Are you serious honestly? What rock had you crawled under when California as a state almost failed completely simply because of some dumb ass punks over and Enron taking advantage of the new energy deregulation rules?
Did you take time out to view any senate hearings, or read the Enron reports and documentaries made about how they cut off power in California to create a futures bonanza for themselves? ARe you aware that people actually died just so that these companies could profit?

CBS) <!-- sphereit start -->When a forest fire shut down a major transmission line into California, cutting power supplies and raising prices, Enron energy traders celebrated, CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales reports.

"Burn, baby, burn. That's a beautiful thing," a trader sang about the massive fire.

Four years after California's disastrous experiment with energy deregulation, Enron energy traders can be heard – on audiotapes obtained by CBS News – gloating and praising each other as they helped bring on, and cash-in on, the Western power crisis.

"He just f---s California," says one Enron employee. "He steals money from California to the tune of about a million."

"Will you rephrase that?" asks a second employee.

"OK, he, um, he arbitrages the California market to the tune of a million bucks or two a day," replies the first.

The tapes, from Enron's West Coast trading desk, also confirm what CBS reported years ago: that in secret deals with power producers, traders deliberately drove up prices by ordering power plants shut down.

"If you took down the steamer, how long would it take to get it back up?" an Enron worker is heard saying.

"Oh, it's not something you want to just be turning on and off every hour. Let's put it that way," another says.

"Well, why don't you just go ahead and shut her down."

Officials with the Snohomish Public Utility District near Seattle received the tapes from the Justice Department.

"This is the evidence we've all been waiting for. This proves they manipulated the market," said Eric Christensen, a spokesman for the utility.

That utility, like many others, is trying to get its money back from Enron.

"They're f------g taking all the money back from you guys?" complains an Enron employee on the tapes. "All the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers in California?"

"Yeah, grandma Millie, man"

"Yeah, now she wants her f------g money back for all the power you've charged right up, jammed right up her a------ for f------g $250 a megawatt hour."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/eveningnews/main620626.shtml

Here is a little preview of the a$$holes in the energy industry would like to F#@k every one over!


Enron is the legacy you now want to pass on to the american people with this deregulation bullshit?

People, do you honestly think its a coincidence that that no oil companies have built any refinaries in the last 30 or so years? Have you read the internal memos of said companies using this as a strategy to kurb oil supply and maintain high oil prices?

THat is the legacy of deregulation that you expect every one to just shut up about and swallow?

This idea is incredibly stupid!!!!



Ps..I know there are alot of loser wimpy as$holes who want to get me banned. In this rabid post, i dont attack the poster but the author of the idea...So dont accuse me of being abusive !!!

 

[brucefan]

LEARN THE WHOLE STORY BEFORE YOU JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS


FROM RON PAUL

Enron: Under-Regulated or Over-Subsidized?

New revelations concerning wrongdoings at Enron seem to surface every day,
and the scandal took a tragic turn last week with the suicide of a top Enron executive.
In Washington, Congress has been scrambling to assemble hearings that will
make various members look properly outraged and committed to reform.
The popular media and some politicians want to portray Enron
as a reckless company whose problems stemmed from a lack of federal oversight.
Already legislation has been introduced to force all publicly traded companies to submit to federal audits.

In truth, however, the problem was not the lack of government involvement with Enron,
but rather the close relationship between Enron and government.
Enron in fact was deeply involved with the federal government throughout the 1990s,
both through its lobbying efforts and as a recipient of large amounts of corporate welfare.

Enron provides a perfect example of the dangers of corporate subsidies.
The company was (and is) one of the biggest beneficiaries of Export-Import Bank subsidies.
The Ex-Im bank, a program that Congress continues to fund with your tax dollars,
essentially makes risky loans to foreign governments and businesses for projects involving American companies.
The Bank, which purports to help developing nations,
really acts as a naked subsidy for certain politically-favored American corporations-
especially corporations like Enron that lobbied hard and gave huge amounts of cash to both political parties.
Its reward was more that $600 million in cash via six different Ex-Im financed projects.

One such project, a power plant in India, played a big part in Enron's demise.
The company had trouble selling the power to local officials,
adding to its huge $618 million loss for the third quarter of 2001.
Former president Clinton worked hard to secure the India deal for Enron in the mid-90s;
not surprisingly, his 1996 campaign received $100,000 from the company.
Yet the media makes no mention of this favoritism.
Clinton may claim he was "protecting" tax dollars,
but those tax dollars should never have been sent to India in the first place.

Enron similarly benefitted from another federal boondoggle,
the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. OPIC operates much like the Ex-Im Bank,
providing taxpayer-funded loan guarantees for overseas projects,
often in countries with shaky governments and economies.
An OPIC spokesman claims the organization paid more than one billion dollars
for 12 projects involving Enron, dollars that now may never be repaid.
Once again, corporate welfare benefits certain interests at the expense of taxpayers.

The point is that Enron was intimately involved with the federal government.
While most in Washington are busy devising ways to "save" investors with more government,
we should be viewing the Enron mess as an argument for less government.
It is precisely because government is so big and so thoroughly involved
in every aspect of business that Enron felt the need to seek influence through campaign money.
It is precisely because corporate welfare is so extensive
that Enron cozied up to Congress and the Clinton administration.
It's a game every big corporation plays in our heavily regulated economy,
because they must when the government, rather than the marketplace, distributes the spoils.

This does not mean Enron is to be excused.
There seems to be little question that executives at Enron deceived employees and investors,
and any fraudulent conduct should of course be fully prosecuted.
Yet we should not allow criminal fraud in one company,
which constitutionally is a matter for state law,
to justify the imposition of burdensome new accounting and stock regulations.
We certainly should not allow the Enron collapse to be characterized
as a failure of capitalism or free markets, because the opposite is true.
The Enron collapse provides an example of how government does so much
to prevent the market from working properly in the first place.





ANOTHER GREAT VIEW POINT

ALTHOUGH YOU WOULDN'T know it from the wall-to-wall O.J.-style coverage, most Americans, in fact, didn't work at Enron (ENRNQ) or hold its stock. Most Americans had no financial interest in the company and felt no real economic impact from its collapse.

That is...until now. As no fewer than 10 congressional committees pick through the rubble, the investigation might end up pinching more collective pocketbooks than the implosion itself.
That's because most Americans — and their elected representatives — will draw the wrong lessons from Enron: Investors were robbed. Big-business executives are evil. Free markets and deregulation just don't work.
But the real story, as best evidenced by trading in Enron stock itself, is once again that trading is a game of risk management. We live in a world of uncertainty, and at any given point in a free market, the risk of an enterprise is borne solely by those who choose to take it. Somewhere down the line we forget that stock investing is a speculative game for any number of reasons — including fraud.
The success of the free markets here is that investors did lose billions, but those who were hurt were solely those who freely took the risk of holding the company's securities. (Enron's employees, who lost vast sums in their retirement accounts, are the one exception — and that's because they weren't operating in a free market but were instead forced to accept and hold Enron shares in those accounts.) MORE ON STOCKS FROM SMARTMONEY.COM

Foreign Oil Cheaper Than Pickens Plan

8 Companies With Awesome Cash Flow

Bargain Hunting in the Financial Sector





Almost every single market day as the scandal unfolded, Enron has been priced and actively traded, first on the prestigious New York Stock Exchange, and then in the Pink Sheets. And while the company has declared bankruptcy, you can still buy and sell its shares — which trade for pennies apiece.
This is the untold success of the Enron debacle. The public securities markets, in their pure, unregulated form, have again proven themselves to be the finest mechanism for risk transference in history. At any point during the past 12 months, an unrestricted shareholder has been able to get out of owning Enron stock. The market has been deep and liquid.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=270 align=left border=0 valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=250 border=0 valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD><HR width=250 SIZE=1>[FONT=arial,helvetica]What we saw in Enron last year was not the worst of the free market but the best of it. [/FONT]</TD></TR><TR><TD align=right><HR width=250 SIZE=1></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD><TD width=20> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Enron's collapse was abrupt, but it wasn't instantaneous. As we first noted a few weeks back, one point that's continually overlooked by both the media and government alike is that Enron didn't fall from $80 to pennies in just one day. And the risk of holding Enron wasn't borne solely by Mom-and-Pop investors. It was sliced up by the options traders, market makers, hedge funds and small speculators who regularly trade in and provide liquidity to a company's shares. By and large, those who had money in Enron were making a bet they wanted to take. This is the main triumph of a free market: Risk is transferred and traded, not forced upon anyone (with again, the exception of Enron employees). What we saw in Enron last year was not the worst of the free market but the best of it.
In the wake of Enron, Kmart (KM) and ImClone (IMCL), many investors are calling for new regulations to protect American investors from unscrupulous auditors and executives. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Enron's case is the exception, not the rule. And shareholders always have the right to sell their shares. When in doubt, get out. Enron reminds us that regardless of the fundamentals, the tape never lies. Arthur Andersen and Moody's are credible to a point, but at the end of the day, the only thing you can trust is the price action itself. Because the name of the game is wealth protection, there's something to be said for learning when to just cut your losses.
Ironically, one wishes that the government regulators who are now swooping down on Enron, denouncing its executives and business model, would take a closer look at their own management skills instead. While most Americans will lose no money on Enron, we all continue to fund an equally foolish and malignant business enterprise in which we unfortunately can't reduce our risk.
It was reported last week that Amtrak, the federally subsidized national railroad, lost more money than ever before, clocking a 2001 operating loss of $1.1 billion. For fiscal 2002, the railroad has received an additional $521 million dollars in taxpayer money. Since 1971, when Amtrak was created, we've been unwilling shareholders in a company that has cost approximately $25 billion. Amazon.com (AMZN) made a profit in five years as a publicly traded company; Amtrak has yet to post a profit in 30 years as a privileged, private firm.
Amtrak, like Enron, pays no income tax, although Enron had to resort to some complicated accounting to achieve its tax-free status; as a quasi-governmental agency, Amtrak is exempt altogether. How'd you like to run a business that didn't have to pay any taxes, lose a billion dollars and still get another federal subsidy worth hundreds of millions?
And unlike Enron, whose natural-gas and energy trading platform was widely used by industry players, ridership on Amtrak has barely budged, even with the Sept. 11 disaster. Americans took only 22.5 million trips by Amtrak compared with 665 million trips by commercial aircraft. In 1996, the average taxpayer subsidy per Amtrak rider was $100, or 40% of the total per-passenger cost. But because this isn't a stock you can choose to own, but a tax that's forced upon us, we can't get out.
I wish our senators and representatives would focus more on the companies they've decided to run, at public expense, instead of devoting their attention to a problem that doesn't need fixing.
Enron's collapse is tragic for the investors and employees who went down with the ship. And in cases where there's criminal wrongdoing or securities fraud, justice will be ultimately served. But the real story here isn't the free market's failure, but its success, best exemplified by the peaceful right of investors to buy, sell, trade and assume or avoid risk as they see fit. Jonathan Hoenig is portfolio manager at Capitalistpig Asset Management, a Chicago-based hedge fund. At the time of writing, his fund was long shares of Enron.

 

[TomKing]

Wayne Root is a scammer which definately makes him presidential material.

 

[jambolaya1]

Brucefan...

You really should try to read through your own posts before you splash them on the forum.

That entire post you made does not make one single valid point in favor of regulation. Instead they talk about government subsidies and close ties to corporate America. But no where does it make a single valid point in favor of deregulation.

If you had bothered to read it before you posted you would know this.

REally if a person reads this whole article and applies it to the great financial fiasco we as Americans are facing, they would have to seriously question the sanity of a moron trying to tell him we need less regulation.

It has failed in the Enron example given and has also produced the biggest financial disaster in our history.

But you insist on posting nonsensical crap that seeks to minimize the true fall out of the Enron case and more or less tells you, "invest your money, if you get burned it was bound to happen. Fraud exists so deal with it"

 

[brucefan]

What are you talking about?

That entire post you made does not make one single valid point in favor of regulation

I dont want REGULATION. Did you read it?

The big picture here is that big govt is not the answer, free markets are.

Getting in bed with corporate lobbyists and getting ridiculous , misguided corporate subsidies helped grow this monster. These are all ways where the govt makes poor choices that has blowback in the system. Their involvement creates more problems.


"We certainly should not allow the Enron collapse to be characterized
as a failure of capitalism or free markets, because the opposite is true.
The Enron collapse provides an example of how government does so much
to prevent the market from working properly in the first place."

 

[jambolaya1]

What are you talking about?

That entire post you made does not make one single valid point in favor of regulation

I dont want REGULATION. Did you read it?

The big picture here is that big govt is not the answer, free markets are.

Getting in bed with corporate lobbyists and getting ridiculous , misguided corporate subsidies helped grow this monster. These are all ways where the govt makes poor choices that has blowback in the system. Their involvement creates more problems.




"We certainly should not allow the Enron collapse to be characterized
as a failure of capitalism or free markets, because the opposite is true.
The Enron collapse provides an example of how government does so much
to prevent the market from working properly in the first place."

That was a typo and it should read "de-regulation

And the examples cited in your little quote do not mention anywhere that regulation was at fault. They talk about subsidies and federal programmes that have nothing to do with deregulation..


I will state again. Only an insane person, in the light of the sub prime mess we are looking at would even stand up to offer up an idea as obtuse as deregulation.

Even the daftest person on the planet, having seen what deregulation has done to the financial industry has done to our economy would see that idea for the total bunk it is.

Banks left to their own devices sought to prey on the dim witted borrowers and they did so to their own detriment. (this is a great example of a free market economy) Now the same banks are running to the government seeking assistance and help to prevent them from going under. Our financial system is facing collapse and were it not for the government bailing out Bear Sterns, the shit would have hit the fan a long time ago.

I stand by my statement and you are yet to post anything talking about deregulation...


Ps..Dont waste your time making posts about subsidies and federal programmes that have nothing to do with deregulation. Some of us are not that easily fooled by people making parallel arguments that have nothing to do with the core issue!!!

 

[brucefan]

Just curious, what were you paying for a long distance call 15 years ago before the break up the phone company?

Seem to remember a policy of paying more per minute during the day , then at night ( like most wireless plans now), and also because of the monopoly, they were getting away with charging me more to call Ca. from
Phila , then Phila to NJ. hmmm, thats funny. I dont think it costs them more money to complete that call just because it was cross country?

Lotta fat in those pricing models huh??

If I didnt know any better I would have to think competition drove those costs down???? Nah , couldn't be that

 

[jambolaya1]

Just curious, what were you paying for a long distance call 15 years ago before the break up the phone company?

Seem to remember a policy of paying more per minute during the day , then at night ( like most wireless plans now), and also because of the monopoly, they were getting away with charging me more to call Ca. from
Phila , then Phila to NJ. hmmm, thats funny. I dont think it costs them more money to complete that call just because it was cross country?

Lotta fat in those pricing models huh??

If I didnt know any better I would have to think competition drove those costs down???? Nah , couldn't be that

Yeah right, because you have failed to defend the obviously nonsensical Enron crap and the current banking fiasco you are now seeking a red herring.

You are trying to lurch onto another situation because its become obvious to you that you have absolutely no leg to stand on.

I will give you credit. At least you figured out that you were talking nonsense and attempted to change tactics.

Too bad for you i dont waste my time answering arguments designed to hide the fact that you are wrong and you are still yet to justify the nonsensical ideas put forth in your post extolling the very same lunacy that has brought this nation to the brink of financial disaster..

Ps..Find some other nut to play those infantile games with..I dont trick that easy!!!

 

[random1323]

i don't think he switched because he was wrong. i think he switched because refused to look at the situation in a different light.

 

[jambolaya1]

i don't think he switched because he was wrong. i think he switched because refused to look at the situation in a different light.

Actually i didnt refuse to look at anything in a different light. I read his posts and couldnt find one single valid argument against deregulation. All i found were parallel arguments against government subsidies and programmes that go against the principals of a free market economy. While these arguments are valid, they are completely separate and different from deregulation.

And to be honest, there is really little one can say against government intervention in the face of enron and the even larger financial fiasco we face currently. You may have the balls to say Enron was just one small isolated case, I defy you to say that about practically every standing bank in the USA right now!!!

 

[brucefan]

Actually i didnt refuse to look at anything in a different light. I read his posts and couldnt find one single valid argument against deregulation. All i found were parallel arguments against government subsidies and programmes that go against the principals of a free market economy. While these arguments are valid, they are completely separate and different from deregulation.

And to be honest, there is really little one can say against government intervention in the face of enron and the even larger financial fiasco we face currently. You may have the balls to say Enron was just one small isolated case, I defy you to say that about practically every standing bank in the USA right now!!!

Wow, you are having issues

Why would I find an argument against deregulation? I believe that deregulation, less govt, is a good thing. You are again confused.
I also pointed out how prices have come down dramatically in the case of the phone companies, and uncovered some pricing abuse that completely ripped off the public. I think that's an argument FOR deregulation

If you think this banking crises was caused by free markets , your again misguided. The actual existence of the Federal Reserve, as well as Govt agencies like FNMA and FHLMC provided tools to manipulate the free market system. In the case of the Fed, you have a private bank in charge of money supply and interest rates. No free market there.

FNMA and FHLMC just provide artificial guarantees to allow for more risky business practices


grab some popcorn

Listen to DR PAUL and take notes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k94VWPjUQSM&feature=related

 

[jambolaya1]

Wow, you are having issues

Why would I find an argument against deregulation? I believe that deregulation, less govt, is a good thing. You are again confused.
I also pointed out how prices have come down dramatically in the case of the phone companies, and uncovered some pricing abuse that completely ripped off the public. I think that's an argument FOR deregulation

If you think this banking crises was caused by free markets , your again misguided. The actual existence of the Federal Reserve, as well as Govt agencies like FNMA and FHLMC provided tools to manipulate the free market system. In the case of the Fed, you have a private bank in charge of money supply and interest rates. No free market there.

FNMA and FHLMC just provide artificial guarantees to allow for more risky business practices


grab some popcorn

Listen to DR PAUL and take notes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k94VWPjUQSM&feature=related

Again..you are taking a few typos and feeling like you have free reign to run off with bogus arguments...


fine then i will correct it and make my statement once again.

You have not posted one damn thing specifically pointing out anything in favor of deregulation.. NOt a damn thing!!!

And you are still yet again making points that dont address the issue of regulation in any of your posts.

You are yammering on and on about how artificial gurantees allow bankers to engage in risky practices. I will say yet again, this has nothing to do with regulation of the banking industry!

Its the bankers who acted on their own free will and without regulation who created this mess. Whether or not government had programmes encouraging this is really irrelevant.

That is about as stupid as saying "I bit off my one arm because i was promised free healthcare and treatment" there fore its the fault of the insurance provider that i chewed off my own arm!!!:missingte:missingte:missingte

 

[brucefan]

I know this may be a stretch, but try , try, as hard as you can to read and understand this.

Bob Barr Says Privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, End Government Subsidies
July 15, 2008 3:35 pm EST
Oklahoma City, OK -- The latest financial crisis involving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which guarantee home mortgages, demonstrates yet again how government intervention in private markets almost always comes to grief. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are nominally private, but were created by Congress and enjoy significant advantages over truly private companies, including cheaper borrowing, lower capital requirements, and an implicit federal guarantee.
As a result, the two organizations behaved irresponsibly, confident that they were “too big to fail.” They own $5.1 trillion in mortgage debt, almost half of the nation’s total. With the sub-prime lending crisis in full swing, their losses are up, their capital is down, and their ability to borrow is falling. Immediate privatization is difficult because the markets doubt the organizations can survive without government support. Insolvency and a forced asset sale would roil both the housing and financial markets.
These problems are almost entirely the fault of the federal government. Congress created programs to artificially inflate the housing market, established Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to be exempt from normal scrutiny, oversight, and competition, and expanded their activities in response to the sub-prime lending meltdown. Government must get out of the mortgage business, but must do so in a way that least harms taxpayers and the economy.
In the short-term, government has little choice but to provide an explicit but limited loan guarantee, thereby capping the public’s liability, now widely assumed to be without limit. At the same time, Congress must restrict the number and size of loans by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and set more substantial capital requirements, while authorizing greater Federal Reserve oversight of their operations. The organizations must begin downsizing their portfolios, reducing their risks, and reestablishing their financial credibility.
However, the ultimate objective must be full privatization—with both organizations turned into private companies, responsible for their loan portfolios, and with access to government guarantees or other forms of support. Government should not be in the business of creating multi-billion dollar enterprises to manipulate markets for the benefit of one group or another—in this case, in order to shave the interest rates for selected home buyers by a quarter or half percent.
Finally, we must learn the lesson that government subsidy programs almost always end up running out of control, causing financial disaster for taxpayers. A Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac collapse could cost most than $1 trillion. The U.S. already has a $14 trillion national debt. Far worse, the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare top $100 trillion. American taxpayers cannot afford additional special interest subsidies and bail-outs.
Moreover, the entire economy suffers from the sort of market manipulation practiced by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as the multitude of direct housing subsidy programs. Indeed, the impact of the sub-prime lending crisis has gone far beyond the housing market. The largely unaccountable Federal Reserve has made many of these problems worse, by extending further bail-outs and creating additional taxpayer liabilities. Congress must limit the Fed’s activities as well, and force it to act with greater transparency and oversight.
Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizens’ right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

 

[JDeuce]

But first let's drill, drill and drill somemore. Build new oil refineries. Build new nuclear plants. Encourage oil shale exploration and gas to liquid production. Build new clean coal plants.


Hey, sounds great for the interim.

Why can't we get anymore refineries online though? In other words, who would step in the way if deregulation were implemented? Hrrrm, I have no idea...

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1049097,CST-NWS-bp10.article

So when the global warming scare fails to choke the Capitalistic economy, you guys just step on the air hose. Good job!

Vote Democrat baby...we can make it to $10 a gallon if we really try!