A free market is a system of exchange of goods and services that is free from government intervention or interference.
Judge Napolitano, during his 9.23.2011 ‘Plain Truth’ segment has taken the time to explain exactly what a ‘free market’ is, the ridiculous argument that our ‘free markets’ caused the recession, that there isn’t an industry in the US that IS NOT regulated by the government, that ‘capitalism’ and ‘free markets’ ARE NOT the same thing, and exactly what we have currently operating in our country; namely crony capitalism or corporatism where the government picks winners and losers. He also explains Karl Marx and Friedrich Hayek’s theories on who should control and regulate debt; namely the government vs. the free markets. I urge my readers and newbies passing through to watch the entire 5 minute video because you will actually learn something you did not know; I know I did. (more…)
I am absolutely sick to death of an administration and a government that actually thinks that they can fix the problems they created. The insanity of allowing the District of Criminals to continue proposing legislation that will create even bigger problems than we have now is making my per day Advil intake increase. At what point are we going to be able to chop the federal government down to size? Obama and crew are now proposing limits on the big banks, and before you get ready to throw something at me because I’m not jumping on the “Kill Wall Street” bandwagon, hear me out. I can’t stand Wall Street, but I understand that what has transpired was because of the socialist laws that Congress passed back in the ’90’s, and the resulting drive for profits which the free market is based on. Do you realize the number of ‘little people’ invested in those banks for their retirement and how a congress (because of their economic and capitalist ignorance), sold those peoples’ futures down the river?
Would you agree or disagree that the same people that gave us the housing bubble, namely Congress, should be the ones to create even more legislation (with unintended consequences) to fix the problem? Can anyone explain to me why politicians are creating banking legislation? Other than becoming millionaires while in office, what actual real life experience do they bring to the table? Has Barney Frank been a CEO of a Fortune 500 company? Does he, in his heart of hearts, understand how business actually grows and thrives? No? Then why is the US Government, which is one of the largest corporations in the world being run by total economic morons. Is it okay with you to let them regulate the banks when you understand that they are just people who ran for political office, and are then able to vote to raise the credit card limit on the country anytime they want because the alternative is too frightening to even consider? The current and former congresses have brought America to the brink of financial collapse, and now they want to tell the banks how to ‘act right’ according to liberal left policies?
They brought us the Community Reinvestment Act that was beefed up in the ’90’s which required banks to make quotas on mortgages to low income buyers or suffer hefty fines. Nice 20/20 hindsight of what occurs when leveling the playing field according to socialist standards instead of capitalist standards.
They have added almost $3 Trillion in debt in the last year and are on the verge of adding $2 TRILLION more just to get through to 2011. AYFKM? The American Public told Bush, Obama, and Congress not to bail out the banks because we saw what was coming; us lowly simpletons. Now we are mired in a total clusterf*** with an administration that wants to abolish capitalism but can’t quite figure out how to kill it because 76% of the American People are CAPITALISTS!
Capitalism is not the enemy; socialist driven Congresses are. Small and large businesses are trying to survive the regulations being placed on them by the government by shipping jobs to other countries because of union legacy costs, insanely high taxes, expensive manufacturing, etc., etc., etc.!
Now, the socialists economic imbeciles are attempting to cage the beast again using socialist ideas, and the beast will just flow around the bars because capitalism isn’t against the law…yet.
Big banks have already begun poking the holes in Obama’s new rules—holes they expect their banks to pass through basically unchanged.
The president promised this morning to work with Congress to ensure that no bank or financial institution that contains a bank will own, invest in or sponsor a hedge fund or a private equity fund, or proprietary trading operations unrelated to serving customers for its own profit.
But sources at three banks tell us that they are already finding ways to own, investment in and sponsor hedge funds and private equity funds. Even prop trading seems safe.
A person familiar with the operations of one big Wall Street bank said it expects that new regulation will affect less than 1% of its overall business.
The key phrase is “operations unrelated to serving customers.” The banks plan to claim that much of the business in which it engages is related in one way or another to serving customers. Even proprietary trading, for instance, can become related to customer service if it is done through internal hedge funds in which some outside clients are permitted to invest.
One insider at a bank pointed to JP Morgan Chase’s ownership of the hedge fund Highbridge Capital. It is thought that under a strict “no hedge funds” rule, Highbridge would have to be sold off. But under the rule proposed by the Obama administration, Highbridge can be retained by JP Morgan because outside clients are permitted to invest in it.
A still more devious way is to have a banks own employees be the customers who are invested in the internal hedge funds. That way trading operations can remain closed to outsiders while the regulatory requirement of relating the trading to customer service is met. Goldman Sachs is rumored to be considering this approach. (Goldman isn’t commenting on the regs right now.)
Why don’t we ask a bazillionaire (i.e. capitalist) what he would do with the big banks, and “too big to fail”? Warren Buffet, 1.21.2010
Ted Kennedy is receiving the “Congressional Let Them Eat Cake” Award today for trying to have his cake and eat it too. Ted is also receiving this award because he seems to have adopted that aristocratic attitude which says, “I can do anything I want, whenever I want, to whomever I want.”
In a stunning admission of his frailty, an ailing U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy is asking the governor and legislative leaders to rewrite state law to allow for a temporary gubernatorial appointment to his seat.
In the letter, Kennedy asks that legislation be passed to change a law adopted in 2004 to provide for a special election to choose a new U.S. Senator in the event of a vacancy.
The law was pushed through during the 2004 presidential election because state lawmakers wanted to prevent then-Gov. Mitt Romney from appointing a successor for U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry, who was the Democratic presidential nominee.
Kennedy pushed for that law and he understands how much havoc his open seat would play with Bambi’s Borg moment on healthcare, and how a special election might not swing to the Dems considering how upset “the angry mob” actually is right now.
Here is one more little tidbit to think about in relation to previous articles on the borg absorption of our banks, car companies, and now healthcare; the infamous pie charts. Remember, government is a consumer, not a producer.
7 decades ago, when many of today’s senior citizens were children, just 12% of the economic pie was dependent upon GOVERNMENT (the red slice of the pie).
Restated, 12% of national income was consumed by government spending back then.
This left 88% of the pie to the productive PRIVATE sector (blue pie slice).
At that time the private sector was 7.3 times larger than the government share.
America WAS 88% FREE and 12% socialistic.
PICTURE #2 – post World War II
NOW, watch the non-productive government share in the left chart double to 22% of the economy, from the prior 12% share. (the red slice got bigger),
and note the remaining portion left to the productive private sector has been squeezed out of 10 points, compared to the previous chart.
That 10 point swing was mostly attributed to government getting into the ‘socialized spending business’, starting with the ‘New Deal’
– – basically going into the social business, an area never envisioned by our founding forefathers as a reason for forming a federal government..
At this point, the private sector was about 4 times larger than government – – well below its prior 7 times larger ratio of the first chart.
America was 78% FREE and 22% socialistic. (instead of 88% free and 12% socialistic in the first chart).
NOW, look at the left chart for today.
the government sector (red color) doubled its share again –
from 22% of the economic pie in 1947 to 45% of the economy today,
shrinking the private sector share (blue color) of the economy an extra 21 points – – caused by even more expanded socialistic spending (not intended by our nation’s founders), at rates many times faster than growth of the general economy.
Now the productive private sector (having lost 28 points) is not much bigger than the government-controlled share of the economy;
a long fall from its prior position of being from 5 to 7.3 times larger than government.
American has become 45% socialistic, leaving only 55% FREE, a tremendous move from the first chart of 12% socialistic and 88% free.
That last pie chart is from 2008. I would be willing to bet that the ratio is well reversed from 45/55 – and Barack wants to add 1/7th of our economy in the form of healthcare dollars to that chart.
I suggest you send these pie charts far and wide so that the Not-So-Silent-Anymore Majority fully understands what is at stake.
Are we going to allow the american idol-in-chief and the traitors in the House and Senate to permanently flip this country from capitalism to socialism?