Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
However, shouldn't the goal of governments and people in general to be to *remove* as much risk from life as possible as opposed to using it as something to bet on?
I.e. shouldn't be be building "Utopia" rather than sitting around trying to figure out how to take a bite out of the next player's financial @ss?
I wouldn't say competition is bad, as a side effect of competition is innovation. The ability to do more with less, find new ways of doing things, or doing something never done before.
The problem at hand with how things are is that instead of innovating, it's far easier to throw money at regulators to change the rules in "favor" of those who already have power. Isn't changing the rules "easier" than actually innovating or performing?
Anyhow, I don't think it's going to change because it might be inherent in human nature (difficult to change the status quo) .... but in the mid/long run, those who innovate would beat out those that just want to change the rules and profit off of others misfortune. It's just a matter of economy and how things work.
Of course, they might drown out a lot of competitors before a competitor one ups them. Civilizations rise and fall... powers rise and fall. Same 'ol, same 'ol story.
the big guys are working us. between falling housing prices and wall street the little guy is getting ripped off big time. the most grave threats that loom, the ongoing under the table NAFTA and planned gun grab are the 2 big conspiracies of DC against the little guy.
Really in most cases its more that many rigged their failure themsleves not being able to benefit by decisions they made long ago so times. The that also applies to former wealthy people also.Accumulating and keeping wealth is a tricky business that requires alot of work most times.Some buy into what was thought was a safe route that doesn;t tunout that way and they have nothing to fall back on.That is the old eggs in one basket really.
Keeping wealth is not tricky at all. The only way to lose it is to be a bafoon. How tricky is it to make a bank deposit? That is as simple as it is to keep wealth.
However, shouldn't the goal of governments and people in general to be to *remove* as much risk from life as possible as opposed to using it as something to bet on?
I.e. shouldn't be be building "Utopia" rather than sitting around trying to figure out how to take a bite out of the next player's financial @ss?
I would strongly disagree with you here. In my opinion, the government should have as little to do with private enterprise as possible. What you seem to advocate is a socialist society, where everyone faces the same level of risk and everyone shares equally in the results. That "utopia" never works out in reality.
It doesn't have to be "the wealthiest individuals" who buy low and sell high.
Actually, as the poster above you mentioned, low income individuals cannot afford to put a pony in the race. It takes some amount of income cushion to even play the "buy low sell high" game at all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You tell him Chuck
