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.
I have found Drudge to be very accurate and honest to the cause. The cause being the American nation. His integrity is such that he often angers me, too.
During the past 2 debates, Obama mentioned a letter he wrote to Secretary Paulson warning him of the problems homeowners were facing. I noticed that McCain never challenged his claim, so I assumed it was true. The difference betwee the 2 candidates is that for most of his 26 years, McCain has fought against any kind of regulation.
[url=http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/obamas-prescien.html]The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan (March 25, 2008) - Obama's Prescient Judgment <i>Again</i>[/url]
During the past 2 debates, Obama mentioned a letter he wrote to Secretary Paulson warning him of the problems homeowners were facing. I noticed that McCain never challenged his claim, so I assumed it was true. The difference betwee the 2 candidates is that for most of his 26 years, McCain has fought against any kind of regulation.
rlchurch, while my question was not directed to you, I feel that you are wrong to just say "yes" or "no". If you answer, "yes" then you can have what China does, if you answer "no" then we'll have just a frenzy.
I will say without hesitation that the natural laws of free markets generally will take care of 99% of the issues when personal responsibility is practiced.
Regulatory governments, including American sub-divisions, that over regulate generally wind up enforcing unfairly, i.e. the sign regulations of my county are very hit and miss.
rlchurch, while my question was not directed to you, I feel that you are wrong to just say "yes" or "no". If you answer, "yes" then you can have what China does, if you answer "no" then we'll have just a frenzy.
I will say without hesitation that the natural laws of free markets generally will take care of 99% of the issues when personal responsibility is practiced.
Regulatory governments, including American sub-divisions, that over regulate generally wind up enforcing unfairly, i.e. the sign regulations of my county are very hit and miss.
Free markets produce booms and busts. We're experiencing a bust right now caused by a lack of sufficient government regulation so when you ask the question, "Do we need government regulation." the answer is an unequivocal "YES" It is that simple.
NO!!! Risk and reward are necessary. I am sorry you missed econ 101
There is nothing simple about it. At all.
Call me on January 21, 2013 and tell me where you stand, especially if BHO is elected.
Actually I made an A in Economics 101, 201, 301.... You haven't come close to making an economics argument either. Free markets require regulation. We've proved that empirically.
During the past 2 debates, Obama mentioned a letter he wrote to Secretary Paulson warning him of the problems homeowners were facing. I noticed that McCain never challenged his claim, so I assumed it was true. The difference betwee the 2 candidates is that for most of his 26 years, McCain has fought against any kind of regulation.
Regulation of private industry is wrong, regulation of government sponsored industry is a requirement. Notice the specific institutions in question were ALREADY government sponsored. There is a big difference here.
I have found Drudge to be very accurate and honest to the cause. The cause being the American nation. His integrity is such that he often angers me, too.
Who cares? He voted for the bailout despite 90% of voters being against it.
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.