Miscellaneous > The Lounge
Should the US government do anything about the financial crisis?
SiMuLaCrUm:
See what happens. If nothing fixes it self in say, 4 or 5 months, try to fix it.
But since it is the marketers and their greed that got the economy in this mess in the first place, I think it should be their responsibility to fix it.
worker201:
--- Quote from: SiMuLaCrUm on 1 October 2008, 04:22 ---See what happens. If nothing fixes it self in say, 4 or 5 months, try to fix it.
But since it is the marketers and their greed that got the economy in this mess in the first place, I think it should be their responsibility to fix it.
--- End quote ---
Economics is a weird science. Things you do now might have no effect for 2 years, and effects you see immediately might actually be effects of something that happened 10 years ago. It's not like fixing a car, where if it dies on the side of the road, you just call a wrecker and take it to the shop, where they quote you a price to get it back on the road again. Economics is more hit/miss - any bailout plan may work, or it may not. Even if we were to come up with a super-lucky plan that guaranteed results, we still wouldn't see the benefits for 6 months. Effectively, you're suggesting an entire year of bank runs, foreclosures, stock dives, and low-level tinkering. Not a good idea. Either do it now and cross your fingers, or commit to non-interference and set up a bunch of shelters.
Refalm:
--- Quote from: worker201 on 1 October 2008, 08:17 ---Either do it now and cross your fingers, or commit to non-interference and set up a bunch of shelters.
--- End quote ---
If the market is supposed to be natural and unpredictable, wouldn't not interfering with it be much better than a few experts trying to influence the flow of cash every day?
WMD:
This whole bailout thing to me reeks of a child who scraped his knee and is running to mommy to make it all better.
We fucked up - now time to pay the price. Government is not our mommy. Besides, bailing everyone out might end up increasing future risk-taking: "It's ok, if we screw up again, we'll just ask the government for another bailout."
worker201:
--- Quote from: Refalm on 1 October 2008, 09:43 ---
--- Quote from: worker201 on 1 October 2008, 08:17 ---Either do it now and cross your fingers, or commit to non-interference and set up a bunch of shelters.
--- End quote ---
If the market is supposed to be natural and unpredictable, wouldn't not interfering with it be much better than a few experts trying to influence the flow of cash every day?
--- End quote ---
The subject of much debate. I personally believe that left to its own devices, a completely unregulated market would lead to quite severe exploitation. Slavery, serfdom, sharecropping and shantytowns are all potential products of an unregulated market. If we wish to prevent these things (and it appears that we in fact do), then some regulation must be performed. But how much? In this particular case, I think the amount of damage done by non-regulation would be greater than the potential cost of regulation. Pick a time when not so much is on the line to experiment.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version