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.
Do you really think one human can come up with a regulatory system another human through evolution intelligence can not side step?
"Evolution intelligence"?
Anyway, no there aren't any regulatory schemes that some individual or group of individuals will not attempt to circumvent. That applies to the simplest stricture, thou shalt not steal, to the most complex ponzi scheme. So, what are we to take from the question? Since someone will always try to circumvent not only the law itself but the spirit in which it was enacted that are we to cease enacting regulation? Is the argument that there will always be law breakers and circumventors so why pass laws and regulations?
Anyway, no there aren't any regulatory schemes that some individual or group of individuals will not attempt to circumvent. That applies to the simplest stricture, thou shalt not steal, to the most complex ponzi scheme. So, what are we to take from the question? Since someone will always try to circumvent not only the law itself but the spirit in which it was enacted that are we to cease enacting regulation? Is the argument that there will always be law breakers and circumventors so why pass laws and regulations?
yes we should cease regulating. regulation only gives us a false sense of security. we are always preparing for yesterdays criminal. de-regulation, which btw has not been the case through dubyas presidency, makes every man woman and child the regulator. while we're at it, maybe we could examine limited liability statutes which allow bankers to take huge risk with opm and when the fit hits the shan they escape in their private jets to their secluded island hideaways!
unfortunately we need a paradigm shift. perhaps we can take some historical examples of REAL 'free market' banking from the Scottish Free Banking System!
perhaps we should open our minds a little, break away from centuries of central bank propaganda and debate whether free markets are the way to go. what we've had btw is nowhere near the free market!
No. That's why new regulations are constantly being created and new technologies and methods implemented to enforce them.
And the final result is....
One end of the spectrum is no regulation at all the other is no freedoms at all. The end results in no freedoms at all if every law or restriction that pops up can be countered with more and more laws created (for example our tax code which is currently having a major influence on the ability of our Treasury Secretary getting a decent staff). Communism just skipped that detail and destroyed anyone that might be opposed to the system while putting the poor people who couldn't produce on their own into labor camps. There is only one result from more and more regulations. One day you wake up and realize we just took the slow path to communism/socialism/collectivism....etc and everything in your life is dictated through legislation. Why would anyone in their right mind avoid the end result. In equations that's what you are trying to achieve. It's like we are in the middle of equation and avoiding the facts/numbers in the middle of it in hopes we haphazardly find the result.
These companies would have never gotten as big as they are without having the implications that nothing can go wrong because it's so big and government is backing it (the GSE's and of course the insurance company). If you can take as many risk as needed to get to that size without any worries it's a freebie. You see what the freebie mentality is today in these institutes. They are receiving bailout money and have been and now they are using that money to file a lawsuit in which they are saying they are owed back taxes.
These companies would have never gotten as big as they are without having the implications that nothing can go wrong because it's so big and government is backing it (the GSE's and of course the insurance company). If you can take as many risk as needed to get to that size without any worries it's a freebie. You see what the freebie mentality is today in these institutes. They are receiving bailout money and have been and now they are using that money to file a lawsuit in which they are saying they are owed back taxes.
When you live by the "RISK" you'll die by the "RISK", that why its called a risk. It is a complete fraud upon the people to allow these risk takers a free pass out of the risk.
Basically if you can't come up with a perfect regulatory system why make the entire public responsible for them and not just the Share Holders, Board of Directors, Employees..etc... you know the people that caused it.
That doesn't mean 0 regulations though so don't get me wrong. I realize it's more complicated because you need to protect customers from out right fraud.
One end of the spectrum is no regulation at all the other is no freedoms at all. The end results in no freedoms at all if every law or restriction that pops up can be countered with more and more laws created (for example our tax code which is currently having a major influence on the ability of our Treasury Secretary getting a decent staff). Communism just skipped that detail and destroyed anyone that might be opposed to the system while putting the poor people who couldn't produce on their own into labor camps. There is only one result from more and more regulations. One day you wake up and realize we just took the slow path to communism/socialism/collectivism....etc and everything in your life is dictated through legislation. Why would anyone in their right mind avoid the end result. In equations that's what you are trying to achieve. It's like we are in the middle of equation and avoiding the facts/numbers in the middle of it in hopes we haphazardly find the result.
What are you getting at? Systems of law, formal or informal, have existed since families began banding into clans. Marx lived in the 19th century, so I have no idea how you're making the jump from law to communism.
What do you imagine anarchy would look like? Give it a thought, and you may realize that law and justice systems serve to guarantee freedom to society in general, not the other way around, as you suggest.
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.
