I am really sick of Democrats blaming businesses for the problems in our country

[Rouger2]

Business are in a competitive arena so they must think of themselves in order to win. The best competitors are they ones who have the killer instinct just like in any game you want basketball, football whatever. Since they have that instinct they will do anything they can to win. Government's job is to referee and set the laws to this game. They must think of what is best for all the people and the country not just one company. If they and their regulators do not do their jobs we lose because companies only think of themselves which they should do in their little game. I wish they could see that they are just players in a dam game, but then maybe they would not try so hard because we all benefit from the competition as long as they cannot buy and influence the referees and law makers. That is were the problem is and where the shit hits the fan. Blame our politicians for not doing their jobs and letting themselves be influenced by good times and money that lobbyist throw their way.

[Smull]

Originally Posted by Rouger2

Blame our politicians for not doing their jobs and letting themselves be influenced by good times and money that lobbyist throw their way.

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

The people there don't want our beef. People in Europe don't want our beef. Instead of business rising up to the needs of what could be their multinational consumer base, they magically get our government (USDA) to lobby them to reduce their standards. This way, the company can still make its meat the cheap way, and make more profit.

I completely agree that government shouldn't be helping these businesses.

Originally Posted by Kytro

There is real physcology at work here. People are tricked inot buying things they cannot afford. Yes, I know all about personal responsibility, but many people simoply don't understand what they are getting into, and think they do, becuase they have been mainpulated into thinking so.

This was made worse by the government bailing out the banks that gave out these loans. They made a bad decision that cost them money, but rather than let them suffer the consequences the taxpayers get to pay for their mistake

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

I think there's definitely a middle ground here.. there was certainly predatory lending going on.. should we not do anything about that?

I've said what I thought about insurance in other threads, I don't think those businesses are ethical at all.. they seek to make as many people as possible suffer in order to profit, so whatever happens to them I have no problems with

There's just a middle area between "Let companies do whatever the hell they want." and "Regulate them to the point that they can no longer operate."

What do you consider predatory lending? I have not heard of a single case where people were forced to take out a loan against their will. The fact is people didn't read their contracts and didn't do basic math. I'm not saying the banks dont bear some blame, they do, but I have mixed emotions about the term predatory lending...no one was forced to do anything.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by Smull

But the corporations don't have the power that the government does, like thewise1 said, they can't use force, the gov't can, they can throw you in jail, the gov't can. You aren't forced to deal with any corporation, you choose to. And the entire idea of capitalism is that when one corporation does something not to your liking you simply find yourself another.

Rule by proxy? Indirect power via lobbying can make government the tool of whoever has that control and with it the use of force. No matter how you want to slice it, if there is a vacuum of power someone will fill it, be it government, big corps or dictators. Its just that in the case of corps the indirect route is the best way to go, and since corporations are run by people, they will sure as hell use force, and use it through government.

[Smull]

I agree, i just think the best way to deal with this problem would be to limit the influence corporations have over our government rather than to limit the corporations themselves. If our government is just a "tool" of whomever so happens to currently fill a power vacuum then we have a much larger problem to worry about.

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

It's not always that simple. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it isn't.

It's ALWAYS that simple in a Capitalist system. When it isn't that simple, blame the politicians that aid in industry monopolization and oligopolization.

Pissed off that you can't avoid health care coverage? Blame the politicians and lobbyists that pushed the HMO Act. It's no fucking puzzle that when the federal government offers to indirectly subsidize 30% of your company's cost and allow your company to exist tax-free (HMOs are "non-profit" ), you're going to squash the shit out of your competition.

Pissed off about our failing economy? Blame the politicians and lobbyists that support our fiat monetary system. It's no fucking puzzle that China's oil demand is going up as ours is going down ... might have something to do with our dollar weakening while theirs (HKD and Yuan) are strengthening. Compare gold to HKD and USD, and you'll see that yet another relatively stable commodity has become more expensive for us and less expensive for them.

Pissed off about gas prices? Blame the politicians and lobbyists that regulate the shit out of the industry, taking more than double from these companies than what they make in profit (XOM, for example, paid 27% of revenue in taxes, while netting 11% profit ... so when fascist liberals are bitching about XOM making "too much" () money, just remember that more than double of what they made went to the government).


Yes, in a Capitalist system, it is most definitely that simple. But when the market is in bed with the government, creating a so-called "mixed economy," things get more complicated. There should be a wall of separation between government and market for the same reason that there is one between government and religion.

[Smull]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

Yes, in a Capitalist system, it is most definitely that simple.

Look man, I love capitalism, I think its great the best economic system the world's ever seen, but its not flawless.

[Rhianann]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

What do you consider predatory lending? I have not heard of a single case where people were forced to take out a loan against their will. The fact is people didn't read their contracts and didn't do basic math. I'm not saying the banks dont bear some blame, they do, but I have mixed emotions about the term predatory lending...no one was forced to do anything.

I found this on Homes and Communities - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

What is Predatory Lending?
In communities across America, people are losing their homes and their investments because of predatory lenders, appraisers, mortgage brokers and home improvement contractors who:

• Sell properties for much more than they are worth using false appraisals.
• Encourage borrowers to lie about their income, expenses, or cash available for downpayments in order to get a loan.
• Knowingly lend more money than a borrower can afford to repay.
• Charge high interest rates to borrowers based on their race or national origin and not on their credit history.
• Charge fees for unnecessary or nonexistent products and services.
• Pressure borrowers to accept higher-risk loans such as balloon loans, interest only payments, and steep pre-payment penalties.
• Target vulnerable borrowers to cash-out refinances offers when they know borrowers are in need of cash due to medical, unemployment or debt problems.
• "Strip" homeowners' equity from their homes by convincing them to refinance again and again when there is no benefit to the borrower.
• Use high pressure sales tactics to sell home improvements and then finance them at high interest rates.

What Tactics Do Predators Use?
A lender or investor tells you that they are your only chance of getting a loan or owning a home. You should be able to take your time to shop around and compare prices and houses.
The house you are buying costs a lot more than other homes in the neighborhood, but isn't any bigger or better.
You are asked to sign a sales contract or loan documents that are blank or that contain information which is not true.
You are told that the Federal Housing Administration insurance protects you against property defects or loan fraud - it does not.
The cost or loan terms at closing are not what you agreed to.
You are told that refinancing can solve your credit or money problems.
You are told that you can only get a good deal on a home improvement if you finance it with a particular lender.

Nobody twisted their arms to sign the contract but it sure does look a lot like coercion. Using a false appraisal to charge more for a property than it's really worth is pretty darn shady. You spend the first I don't remember how many years paying interest only on the loan which is why it takes so long to build equity. If these people decide to sell their home to save themselves financially, they find out they are screwed because the value isn't what they thought it was. I call that a victim. Charging a high interest rate based on race is definately predatory.

[Dispatcher]

Originally Posted by thewise1

I've never seen a corporation use force in the USA... I'm sure it's happened, but it's not legal in Washington at least

They don't have to use force. They have something more powerful....money, lobbyists, influence.

That's why corporations run the country instead of the people.
We need to start doing what's right for ALL Americans, not just what's right for the profit statement of Exxon and Wal-Mart. And all regulation is a response to a problem. The assumption that corporations will do the right thing if just left alone has been proven wrong time after time.
We could go back to no pollution standards, toxic waste dumps, no food inspections, unsafe working conditions, and child labor.
But I don't want to.

[Dispatcher]

Originally Posted by Rouger2

Business are in a competitive arena so they must think of themselves in order to win. The best competitors are they ones who have the killer instinct just like in any game you want basketball, football whatever. Since they have that instinct they will do anything they can to win. Government's job is to referee and set the laws to this game. They must think of what is best for all the people and the country not just one company. If they and their regulators do not do their jobs we lose because companies only think of themselves which they should do in their little game. I wish they could see that they are just players in a dam game, but then maybe they would not try so hard because we all benefit from the competition as long as they cannot buy and influence the referees and law makers. That is were the problem is and where the shit hits the fan. Blame our politicians for not doing their jobs and letting themselves be influenced by good times and money that lobbyist throw their way.

Here, Here! I couldn't have said it any better.

[tbone]

Bottom line, the average US citizen is stupid (less than 30% have a college degree and as much as 20% of the adult population do not have a high school equivalent), coupled with corruption being rampant in corporations recently and you get citizens being taken advantage of.

The role of the govenment is to "protect" its citizens and some interpret that as more than just the army protection, thus agencies like the FDA.

Do we need to live in a society of strict regulations? Absolutely not.

But we do need to find a balance between allowing corporations with major power take advantage of citizens and over regulation.

The recent jump in bankruptcies and foreclosures is not good for our country, economy, or capitalism. No one wins when people don't pay there bills.

[motivez]

I think the idea that less regulation would take care of everything flies in the face of this most recent mortgage scandal.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by motivez

I think the idea that less regulation would take care of everything flies in the face of this most recent mortgage scandal.

I can't believe how many people around where I live got rich off the Subprime lending, versus how many people are loosing their homes.



Someone should have been watching them. The stories I've heard, I can't believe the industry became so money grubbing so quickly.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by tbone

Bottom line, the average US citizen is stupid (less than 30% have a college degree and as much as 20% of the adult population do not have a high school equivalent), coupled with corruption being rampant in corporations recently and you get citizens being taken advantage of.

The role of the govenment is to "protect" its citizens and some interpret that as more than just the army protection, thus agencies like the FDA.

Do we need to live in a society of strict regulations? Absolutely not.

But we do need to find a balance between allowing corporations with major power take advantage of citizens and over regulation.

The recent jump in bankruptcies and foreclosures is not good for our country, economy, or capitalism. No one wins when people don't pay there bills.

T-Bone, you post entirely too infrequently start posting more! You seem to be a smart guy and I agree with most of the posts I've seen but I must disagree with calling most of the population "stupid". A college degree does not signify, in it of itself, intelligence. I'm sure you know a few politicians who have graduated from top tier schools that seem to be a few pennies short of a dollar.

Moreover, intelligence is a shifty word that has more than one definition. Common sense is a form of intelligence, so is emotion, book learning, theoretical thinking, pragmatic problem solving and creative thinking. I would venture to guess that true intelligence, when looked at collectively in society, should be a combination of all those I just listed plus many more. A society full of theoretical thinkers is just as flawed and "stupid" as society full of common sense thinkers.

The reason I say this is because its a very fine line between government looking out for the best interest of the people with some regulations (which I agree with) to becoming a nanny state. By calling into question the intelligence of the population is to consider that the people are not mentally equip. to handle it.

My view is that the people are, and that although we do indeed need protection for big things like food safety that we cannot do on our own, other things we need to fail at so we can learn from it and apply it to other situations instead of depending on government making a rule for every situation - causing the rise of the nanny state.

[lew]

I blame businesses that get special privileges from the government (ie corporatism) for a lot of our problems.

[lew]

Originally Posted by motivez

I think the idea that less regulation would take care of everything flies in the face of this most recent mortgage scandal.

The reason it is as bad as it is is precisely because of government manipulation in the markets and in monetary policy.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Dispatcher

They don't have to use force. They have something more powerful....money, lobbyists, influence.

That's why corporations run the country instead of the people.
We need to start doing what's right for ALL Americans, not just what's right for the profit statement of Exxon and Wal-Mart. And all regulation is a response to a problem. The assumption that corporations will do the right thing if just left alone has been proven wrong time after time.
We could go back to no pollution standards, toxic waste dumps, no food inspections, unsafe working conditions, and child labor.
But I don't want to.

Most of those things became much worse for a long time after government got involved.


And most went away, not because of government intervention, but because of technological advancements and business ingenuity.