Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Regulations*

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Mon, 19 Sep 11 5:29 PM | 34 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 05867 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 05866 by clo)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

That would be George Bush and Dick Cheney. And the people that elected them.

I don't think it is illegal to believe that reducing regulations is always beneficial. It's just wrong in many circumstances, and in particular when the result is that bad/weak/amoral people are left unrestrained.

Same thing with the banks and rogue traders. It's the banks which create the laisser faire environment but they make the rogues guilty if they take bad risks.

The issue is philosophical. A lot of people believe in the theory that all regulation is bad. Of course, some regulation is bad and it is also true that excess regulation can be harmful. Just as it is also true that some regulation is useful and insufficient regulation can be harmful.

Unfortunately, human beings don't seem to be especially good at retaining qualified messages. It's easier to live in Limbaugh land, where the government is always evil, rich people are virtuous because they are rich, fortune is irrelevant to outcomes, no taxes are better than low taxes, all public goods are a form of socialism, socialism is synonymous with wickedness and America's foreign policy should be about force and bombs rather than persuasion or example.


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Regulations
By: clo in ALEA
Mon, 19 Sep 11 5:18 PM 		Msg. 05866 of 54959

IMO, his fatal mistake was not going after the people that took our economy down.

Obama couldn't "shape" election funding after he went against HIS promise to accept government matching funds for his.
After he did that I was very wary of any of his "promises"...
Now, this election he's counting on having a BILLION DOLLARS. IMO that is OBSCENE! clo

CNSNews.com) – Both President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama chose to donate $3 each through their 2010 tax returns to help pay for government financing of elections. But as a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama declined to take such financing himself.

The public election financing, known as the Presidential Election Campaign fund, was created by Congress in 1971 as a limit on the amount candidates may spend on presidential elections. It provides a maximum amount -- $84 million in 2008 – to candidates who agree to make it their only source of funding.

In 2008, despite repeated promises to the contrary, Obama refused to tap the fund, electing instead to finance his campaign entirely with private and corporate donations. He raised approximately $745 million in the process.

Obama was the first presidential candidate in history to refuse the federal funds for his general election campaign. 
His opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), became the second when he followed Obama’s lead

for complete:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-donates-public-funding-campaigns-refused-it-himself

« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next