The View From 1776

Liberals’ Wall Street Pirouette

Liberals blaming the takeover of Bear Stearns on capitalism is akin to blaming the homeowner if someone sets fire to his house.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 03/22 at 11:32 PM
  1. The savings rate in China, where may make less than $1 an hour is 35%. Yes, food is 1/10th the cost as it is here but, the point is, that if anybody had an excuse to spend the entire paycheck it would be them.

    Thus, they will have a more stable economy (not stock market) because they can use savings to keep buying the things they make even during brief turn downs, in between jobs, in retirement, etc. Savings creates a potential to minimize the boom-bust spending based economic reversals we see.

    When you are working, you buy everything you can and when laid off are facing bankruptcy and have little to spend with because you have no savings that can easily be cashed out now that the home equity binge is drying up.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  03/23  at  12:34 AM
  2. Today's dollar is a piece of paper that is 100% credit. Its only value is an attribution of faith by the holder. Thus, a capitalism based on such an extreme obligation of pure faith is always placed in jeopardy by a whole economy that encourages pure credit and pure faith.

    Such faith would be a credit to the object and the faithful if it were the only GOD. It is not.

    It is not. It is a humanistic display of faith in man - alone. But, there is a solution.

    It is to place such faith in GOD alone - not man. He is unworthy. He makes a lousy god.

    He is unworthy - and he knows he is.

    semper fidelis
    vincit veritas

    Psalm 25:12 kjv
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  03/23  at  09:49 AM
  3. Everything has a dark side. It is the dark side of capitalism that caused the Bear Stearns debacle, its "creative destruction".

    Capitalism enabled the 'takeover' of Bear Stearns. What else could have done it?
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  03/24  at  01:44 PM
  4. Corporate socialism? When government and corporations get in bed together that isn't capitalism. In capitalism you let failure happen.

    So why didn't they?

    Because government has become very dependent and corporations very dependent on the same group of elite that control both in many ways.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  03/24  at  02:46 PM
  5. Who said that in capitalism you have let things fail or that failure is the only option?
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  03/24  at  03:13 PM
  6. The principles behind it. It is "ownership" and with "ownership" comes the risks associated with it.

    You risk your capital to make gains or losses. You don't get bailed out by government. If you do, that isn't capitalism.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  03/24  at  03:43 PM
  7. Capitalism is not based on Credit alone. Today's dollar is. That is not a fruit of capitalism but of humanistic misplaced egoistic pride in humanistic wishful fairy tales - not reality.

    Only humanistic collectivism has 'faith' in man - alone.


    semper fidelis
    vincit veritas
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  03/24  at  04:48 PM
  8. That isn't a very satisfactory answers, Jan. Accordingly, there should be no such thing as insurance to protect people from disasters or regulations of any kind.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  03/24  at  05:03 PM
  9. If the free-market is willing to risk capital at a price acceptable to the individual or corporate purchaser, then that is captalism.

    Government has no business playing any kind of patty-cake in the unbiased economic market. But, the ego-centric political & bureau types have an unfulfilled appetite for self-value, the humanistic collectivists of any walk, reach out!

    They never did require logic. Still don't.

    semper fidelis
    vincit veritas
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  03/24  at  06:36 PM
  10. Insurance is "ownership" too. People risk the capital they invest that they collected from clients who want to be insured. They can lose everything if their tables on risk are wrong and they have too many claims at one time that would force the liquidation of the investments the company uses for salaries and profits. The stocks and bonds the company owns are subject to risk just like the company that sells widgets in a competitive market.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  03/24  at  11:52 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.