Quote:
Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy
I'll give you two words why any of what you just posted doesn't get any traction: Keating Five. It's the pot calling the kettle....er...black.
|
I guess it's the Northeast in us and you know I'm going to agree with you (mostly) but I think there is more to the response than that.
The principle problem with the so called crisis, is neither Obama or McBush, it's unfettered deregulation. Yes, yes... I'm awaiting the hollow cries of socialism, communism and "ism" you can come up with, but it's a fact. I'm going to give you a simple example of two competing systems and show you "checks and balances" at work:
Canada (some would say) suffers from a high level of regulation (especially compared to the US) and as such many have suggested it is less desirable to do business than the US. Whether or not that is true, is not the point of this, but I'm using Canada as an example of our closest neighbor with stronger regulations which has NOT suffered nearly the way we are now. That is not to say their banks are not feeling the pinch (the globe is), but not nearly at the same level.
In the US, the idea has been the more DEregulation, the better. Now, that *might* be true, but you always NEED a check on any industry. Traditionally, the US has gone the way of lawsuits (ie: it is MUCH easier to litigate in the US than Canada). However, under Bushie, civil remedies against corporate tort feasors have been curtailed to a high degree. So, gone is the threat of lawsuits along with regulation. Essentially, investment bankers became like fight trained pit bulls sitting on your front lawn without a leash.
So, pick your poison. Greater regulation or a greater ability to sue corporate tort feasors and their golden parachutes? Canada has said NO to litigation and yes to regulation. The US has said NO to both and hence our crisis... which brings us to the candidates.
Neither has been a champion of much needed regulation, so I can't toot either horn here, but ask yourself honestly, which one is more likely to reign in the fight trained pit bulls? My money is on Obama, any day of the week.
Look at it this way... years ago we were all told we need to "deregulate" the energy industry because it would foster a culture of "innovation, technology and competition which would lead us down the path of affordable, innovative forms of energy. Has it?
No. Not even close. Energy costs have sky rocketted, innovation is NON-existent, dependence on foreign oil has increased 3 fold in 20 years. Who has really benefitted from deregulation? Exxon? Chavez and Citigo? The corporate fat cats at PSE&G and Consolodated Edison? Right now, as a collective unit, the US lags behind many "western" democracies in overall standard of living. Yes, we might have more billionaires than anyone else, but is that you or me? Will it ever be? Probably not.
Frankly, I'd take more regulation, along with cleaner air and water, cheaper electricity and some job security!
