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

Re: Kasich delivers Ohio

By: DigSpace in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Mon, 22 Feb 16 3:17 AM | 88 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix
Msg. 18189 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 18185 by Cactus Flower)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

on 4 the argument would be that the FHA guarantees created the bad loans, that even with derivatives, in the absence of Freddie, Fannie and all of these things designed to get more people into homes 1) there would be fewer bad loans originated and 2) the price of the entire housing market would never had been so high.

And there were regulators. And they looked away because the politics of universally accessible private home ownership trumped enforcement. That is the argument, so while one could argue for or against the Fed bailout, the argument I am illustrating claims there would be nothing to bail out, that the crisis was CAUSED by government, its guarantees etc.

The argument is guaranteed loans created the bubble and that guaranteed loans are doing it again (student debt). In the absence of guaranteed loans demand goes down, houses cost less, tuition is lower, markets are less distorted ... That is the argument.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Kasich delivers Ohio
By: Cactus Flower
in ALEA
Mon, 22 Feb 16 2:52 AM
Msg. 18185 of 54959

I know these aren't your beliefs, but let me tell you why I think these ideas are not very deep.

How do you define "large government"? The only thing I hear is Republicans demanding reduction. When does small get too small? When is large too large? These sizist memes are too inexact to be useful.

If folks want to reframe their belief systems thoughtfully, they should phrase things a bit differently: where government provides a net benefit, you want to have it; where it provides a net cost, you don't. There is no general rule of government size. There are social environments, many of which may benefit from some government contribution. The type of government contribution you want is the sort that suits the problem. There is no general rule of what contributions match which problems. You build knowledge over time.

For me, that is a statement of traditional conservative philosophy. But you can't find folks who believe in this. It's all "government is necessarily bad, markets are always benevolent" and other such mush.

I have not encountered Republicans who believe in 1-3!!!

Anyone who believes in 4 would have let the world economy destroy itself in 2008, so those folks ain't learnin'. Fortunately, the Fed knew better. What's good for the banks is okay for the rest of us, if extraordinary harms occur when not doing so. The invisible hand hasn't got eyes so it doesn't know where it's going. Sometimes the cliff is up ahead.

Anyone who believes in 5 would also have been content with the lack of regulation of Wall Street leading to 2008, so again, in need of edumacation. Markets do better when someone regulates/stops harmful behaviours before they do the harm they would do otherwise. People cheat and steal. It's a known thing that doesn't vanish because you say it's a marketplace. Markets are pricing mechanisms. So you generally don't want governments to get in the way of that (exceptions for monopolies, oligopolies etc).

Public protections are necessary because folks naturally pass their own costs to third parties eg poisons from mining flushed into rivers that go downstream and affect everyone. People who believe 6 should either read Pigou or just consider the algal blooms at the bottom end of Texan rivers and ponder how they got there.

I have time for 7 and 9.

You get Clean Water Acts because you have government departments that care about the environment.

Surely the ones who believe 1-3 abandoned ship eons ago.

I agree that the Dem candidates are weak this time out. That is a shame.


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