On Sep 9, 3:38Â am, "Sean"
now.com.au> wrote:
> So what would Fred do?
> You know what I'd do Fred?
>
> I'd let them all collapse into bankruptcy.............. the whole damn lot.
So would I, at least in principle. However, arguably, since the gov't
is the primary cause of the mess, it should arguably take some
responsibility for alleviating it. The important thing however is that
we move toward free markets - which almost no one is advocating now -
instead of even more regulation (which is the cause of the problem in
the first place) which virtually everyone is advocating. Or, in other
words, it's the typical problem all over again. Adding regulations and
gov't interference to supposedly solve the very problems the
regulations and interference caused in the first place.
> I wish Ron Paul was there and not John McCain. I've said that before here.
This is a whole other subject and different topic but I oppose Paul
even more than I do McCain.
> I'd let those in their homes, right across the land, stop paying their
> mortgages until an entity had the legal power to force them to pay those
> mortgages.
Umm...there is such an entity. Have you ever heard of foreclosure? Why
should they be freed from the same bankruptcy as everyone else who
made foolish financial decisions? (Although many, if not most, people
who have foreclosure wouldn't necessarily go into bankruptcy. People
who bought homes in the last few years have relatively little equity
in their homes to lose. That in fact was the whole problem. But it's
also why the problem isn't quite as severe as it otherwise would have
been - although it is certainly bad enough)
> I'd like Congress to take back the power to print money, and disband the
> Federal Reserve system entirely,....
Well, yes, but giving the power to Congress hardly helps in that
regard. (I acknowledge that it is granted that power in The
Constitution).
Money is just another commodity. It should be handled by the market
like all other goods, freely - and completely taken out of the hands
of the gov't. The Constitution should be amended on this point, though
unfortunately I don't expect that to happen any time soon, if ever.
> It's time to rip up every mis-named free trade agreement struck by the US...
We don't need "free trade agreements". We just need free trade -
unilateral if necessary. Let those who don't have free trade suffer
accordingly. A country which embraces free trade benefits from it
accordingly even if it is not reciprocated.
England unilaterally adopted free trade in the 19th Cent. and it
became the richest country on earth as a result.
Fred Weiss
