Off-topic Talk Where overpaid, underworked S2000 owners waste the worst part of their days before the drive home. This forum is for general chit chat and discussions not covered by the other off-topic forums.

Citi Group Execs get PWNED...

Old Jan 27, 2009 | 08:25 PM
  #31  
Elistan's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,323
Likes: 28
From: Longmont, CO
Default

Originally Posted by kadeshpa' date='Jan 27 2009, 06:57 PM
Well for one, this country was built on a free market economy.
Somewhat free, somewhat regulated. An entirely free market can produce some very, very nasty things.

Government DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO RUN A BUSINESS.
Neither, so it appears, does the business know how to run itself.

[QUOTE]What got us into this mess?
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 08:26 PM
  #32  
GPMike's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 10,513
Likes: 0
From: USSA
Default

Originally Posted by wickerbill' date='Jan 27 2009, 01:22 PM
I can't imagine being as out of touch with reality as these bank execs are.
I can....look at elected officials.
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 08:39 PM
  #33  
jackalope's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
From: Brazoria
Default

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury.
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 09:28 PM
  #34  
Elistan's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,323
Likes: 28
From: Longmont, CO
Default

Originally Posted by jackalope' date='Jan 27 2009, 11:39 PM
If the market were truly free, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Also, aren't we the american public just as responsible for this as the terrible management? We knew what was going on, but everyone was making money, so we stayed complacent. As a public, we should have called the companies out on their practices, and voted with our wallets, rather than let poorly managed companies with questionable practices continue to thrive.

getting moved to politics forum in 3...2....1....
Wasn't the market more free back in the day that the railroads had their monopolies, Ma Bell had her monopoly, mining/factory towns only had company-run stores, etc.? Seems to me that too much freedom - the freedom to leverage, create credit default swaps, rate anything they want as AAA, etc. - that caused this mess.

Greed of the consumer, greed of the executive - it's all the same. Government is an attempt at being good for OTHER people, rather than oneself. As you say, the screwed up companies should have been called out - but under a free market, with everybody being greedy and riding the gravy train, it'll never happen. Only somebody with a government-like perspective (assuming an ideal, uncorrupted government) can do the things you're asking the "free market" to do.

This isn't really politics, its more economic theory. It'll become "Politics" when somebody starts to mention Democrat vs Republican and tries placing blame on a specific group/person, rather than discuss the role regulations should and should not play in an economic system. And I hope nobody drags this to that level.
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 10:36 PM
  #35  
wraith5's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,018
Likes: 0
From: Moving
Default

Originally Posted by Elistan' date='Jan 27 2009, 10:28 PM
Wasn't the market more free back in the day that the railroads had their monopolies, Ma Bell had her monopoly, mining/factory towns only had company-run stores, etc.? Seems to me that too much freedom - the freedom to leverage, create credit default swaps, rate anything they want as AAA, etc. - that caused this mess.

Greed of the consumer, greed of the executive - it's all the same. Government is an attempt at being good for OTHER people, rather than oneself. As you say, the screwed up companies should have been called out - but under a free market, with everybody being greedy and riding the gravy train, it'll never happen. Only somebody with a government-like perspective (assuming an ideal, uncorrupted government) can do the things you're asking the "free market" to do.

This isn't really politics, its more economic theory. It'll become "Politics" when somebody starts to mention Democrat vs Republican and tries placing blame on a specific group/person, rather than discuss the role regulations should and should not play in an economic system. And I hope nobody drags this to that level.
Great points. There haven't been solid examples of how an entirely free market would pan out. Maybe it'll work in theory, if everyone had decent enough knowledge.
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2009 | 11:45 PM
  #36  
jackalope's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
From: Brazoria
Default

Wasn't the market more free back in the day that the railroads had their monopolies, Ma Bell had her monopoly, mining/factory towns only had company-run stores, etc.? Seems to me that too much freedom - the freedom to leverage, create credit default swaps, rate anything they want as AAA, etc. - that caused this mess.
The monopolies you are giving as an example are not natural monopolies, they were formed with federal intervention through subsidies, land grants, and government loans that showed preferential treatment to certain businesses and not others. In a true free market, the government would show no favoritism, and make the companies come up with their own investors or capitol.

I don't believe we have ever (or will ever) see a natural monopoly.

And what of anti-trust laws? Supposedly created to prevent monopolies, all they do is hinder businesses. Nothing like working hard, and doing a great job, and getting jailed for it. Charging a higher price than a competitor is "exploiting the consumer", the same price is collusion, and a lower price is "unfair" business practices.

And what is wrong with company owned stores? If people really felt there was a need for something else, nothing is stopping them from creating their own store (in a free market that is. In today's market place, large businesses have too many helping hands from the govt that small businesses seldom receive.) And if people really really thought it was a problem, they could vote with their labor: go work for a different company with a different standard of business.
Reply
Old Jan 28, 2009 | 07:10 AM
  #37  
The Gasman's Avatar
Former Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Default

f them. let them fly commercial economy like the rest of us.
Reply
Old Jan 28, 2009 | 07:51 AM
  #38  
Kyushin's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,662
Likes: 1
From: Long Beach, CA
Default

[quote name='senor_flojo' date='Jan 27 2009, 04:41 PM'] why? because the states can't take care of their own shit? you know how much more effecient we'd be if we'd let local government do their jobs? you know how much easier it would be to hold people accountable when they make poor decisions?

but what do I know? I think this country has become a bunch of bullshit to begin with. too much emphasis on consumerism, too much reliance on debt, advertisments everywhere you look. if our forefathers were around to see what we'd become, chances are we'd still be part of england.

but maybe its the anarchist in me who thinks we'd be in a better place if this country fell apart and we were given a chance to rebuild it.

until then, we let big-daddy government "fix" all our problems, like how they've "fixed" our healthcare and education. our government can't fix shit. all it does is create more problems. and then we try to fix other countries problems? ha!

so yeah, we can bail out everyone.... and in 50 years when the majority of our income goes to taxes because of the hundreds of billions we've spent on wars that mean nothing to us, and gross mismanagement of companies, and all that shit hits the fan again because we won't learn a thing from all this and make the same mistakes all over again, and look: we're right back here at square one. its like bailing out GM and Dodge.... they still make inferior products, and still can't pull a profit. we pump money into them, keeping them from filing chapter 11. they need to go under so they can be restructured.

nah, lets keep status quo.

after all, take a look around you. we seem to be doing fine, right? flip on the television, and watch people sell their souls for publicity and notoriety on reality tv shows. see tween brats complain about their 16th birthdays. see celebrities get paid rediculous sums of money to read lines written by people who make a fraction what they do. see how our society is dominated by image, sex, money, and power.

sure, things are just peachy.
Reply
Old Jan 28, 2009 | 08:56 AM
  #39  
kadeshpa's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,867
Likes: 0
From: Oh kwa tan zen wan
Default

Originally Posted by Onehots2k' date='Jan 27 2009, 08:02 PM
Okay then. Write CitiGroup and tell them to go ahead and buy their $50,000,000 upgraded foreign made jet. Its 100% fine. They're in the "free market" and should do whatever they want.
I'd love too, unfortunately a man named Obama put a government stop to that .
Reply
Old Jan 28, 2009 | 08:58 AM
  #40  
wickerbill's Avatar
25 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,642
Likes: 0
From: Tulsa, OK
Default

Originally Posted by kadeshpa' date='Jan 28 2009, 11:56 AM
I'd love too, unfortunately a man named Obama put a government stop to that .
They can also return the $45 billion while they're at it, because that's not in the spirit of a free market economy either.
Reply


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:38 AM.