Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32

Thread: The Need For Regulating Markets

  1. #1
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    The Need For Regulating Markets

    I can pretty much agree with Eliot Spitzer

    http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/s...talk-0428.html

    I thought, ‘We will finally have that epiphany that will bring us back, we will embrace rational policy once again.’ And here we are two years later, and I’m thinking: ‘What happened? How can this possibly be? Didn’t people learn a lesson?’ … I’m afraid to say the answer is no, they didn’t.”


  2. #2
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    I can pretty much agree with Eliot Spitzer

    http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/s...talk-0428.html
    Good find....I logged in and posted a comment.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    Markets are self-regulating, no need for the government to stick its nose in.

    That doesn't mean fraud isn't a crime, or that other practices can be construed as dishonest and thus limited by law. What it does mean is that the government should not attempt to implement regulations for no other reason than influencing the market itself.

    The market was well on it's way to regulating AIG. The government's interference was improper and harmful.

    The market was well on it's way to regulating GM. The government's interference was excessively illegal, partisan, and wasteful. The Mayor will never again by a GM vehicle as a result.

    The market is excessively regulated in the commodities of marijuana, cocaine, and crystal meth. So regulated, in fact, that participants in the market face prison time if caught. This, of course, drives the price up and encourages all sorts of criminal activity, not to mention the extreme waste of tax payer dollars to deny taxpayers their freedom to put stupid things in their body.

  4. #4
    Educator TheBook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Last Seen
    11-28-11 @ 01:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    880

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    The market, when left unregulated, goes into exaggerated boom/bust cycles, where the bust portion of the cycle can lead to a recession or a full-blown depression. That's just basic economics.
    “The more you know, the harder it is to take decisive action. Once you become informed, you start seeing complexities and shades of gray. You realize that nothing is as clear and simple as it first appears. Ultimately, knowledge is paralyzing.” - Bill Watterson
    Who Is Chicago Ted?

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBook View Post
    The market, when left unregulated, goes into exaggerated boom/bust cycles, where the bust portion of the cycle can lead to a recession or a full-blown depression. That's just basic economics.
    Oh. You must mean like when the market created the Great Depression, right?

    Wait. The Federal Reserve created the Great Depression. The Federal Reserve is an unconstitutional arm of the federal government.

    So much for that one.

    OH! The Mayor bets your referring to the Great Recession.

    Wait. The Great Recession is the inevitable cancer resulting from the inhalation of the New Deal, the imposition of unconstitutional government mortgage guarantees, the mucking about and overregulations of markets and the ensuing complexities as people attempted to sort out how to make money in the jungle of regulations.

    So much for your suggestion.

    cycles are part of life, government always makes life harder.

  6. #6
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    We are fools if we do not follow through and re-regulate the markets!
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #7
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    We are fools if we do not follow through and re-regulate the markets!
    We probably already have enough regulations on the books, what is needed is harsh penalties for betrayal of public trust.
    We have the RICO act....
    Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    SummaryUnder RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect triple damages.

    When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO, he or she has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining order or injunction to temporarily seize a defendant's assets and prevent the transfer of potentially forfeitable property, as well as require the defendant to put up a performance bond. This provision was placed in the law because the owners of Mafia-related shell corporations often absconded with the assets. An injunction and/or performance bond ensures that there is something to seize in the event of a guilty verdict.

    In many cases, the threat of a RICO indictment can force defendants to plead guilty to lesser charges, in part because the seizure of assets would make it difficult to pay a defense attorney. Despite its harsh provisions, a RICO-related charge is considered easy to prove in court, as it focuses on patterns of behavior as opposed to criminal acts.[4]

    There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers." The plaintiff must prove the existence of a "criminal enterprise." The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise. A civil RICO action, like many lawsuits based on federal law, can be filed in state or federal court.[5]

    Both the federal and civil components allow for the recovery of triple damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

    Although its primary intent was to deal with organized crime, Blakey said that Congress never intended it to merely apply to the Mob. He once told Time, "We don't want one set of rules for people whose collars are blue or whose names end in vowels, and another set for those whose collars are white and have Ivy League diplomas."[4]

    [edit] RICO offensesUnder the law, racketeering activity means:

    Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
    Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
    Embezzlement of union funds;
    Bankruptcy fraud or securities fraud;
    Drug trafficking; long-term and elaborate drug networks can also be prosecuted using the Continuing Criminal Enterprise Statute;
    Money laundering and related offenses;
    Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
    Acts of terrorism.
    Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. The U.S. Supreme Court has instructed federal courts to follow the continuity-plus-relationship test in order to determine whether the facts of a specific case give rise to an established pattern. Predicate acts are related if they "have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events." (H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.) Continuity is both a closed and open ended concept, referring to either a closed period of conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  8. #8
    Educator TheBook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Last Seen
    11-28-11 @ 01:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    880

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    Oh. You must mean like when the market created the Great Depression, right?

    Wait. The Federal Reserve created the Great Depression. The Federal Reserve is an unconstitutional arm of the federal government.

    So much for that one.

    OH! The Mayor bets your referring to the Great Recession.

    Wait. The Great Recession is the inevitable cancer resulting from the inhalation of the New Deal, the imposition of unconstitutional government mortgage guarantees, the mucking about and overregulations of markets and the ensuing complexities as people attempted to sort out how to make money in the jungle of regulations.

    So much for your suggestion.

    cycles are part of life, government always makes life harder.
    The Federal Reserve was hardly the only cause of the Great Depression. We had the great "taking in loans from American banks to pay off loans to American banks" phase, the production of more goods than people were able to purchase (due to extreme wealth disparity), etc.

    Trying to point to one simple factor and claim it was the only cause of the Great Depression is a simplistic and fallacious argument.
    “The more you know, the harder it is to take decisive action. Once you become informed, you start seeing complexities and shades of gray. You realize that nothing is as clear and simple as it first appears. Ultimately, knowledge is paralyzing.” - Bill Watterson
    Who Is Chicago Ted?

  9. #9
    Educator shintao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    10-19-13 @ 11:47 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    994

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    I can pretty much agree with Eliot Spitzer

    http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/s...talk-0428.html
    I need not say to much. I oppose regulation of the market that creates a bloated government & is paid by unregulated taxpayers, not the regulated. We have a US court system, and a laxed consumerism for anyone harmed by no regulations. Make consumers responsible for their own well being. Let those harmed benefit from a lawsuit, not the government.
    Last edited by shintao; 04-29-11 at 06:44 PM.
    One Tin Soldier Walked Away..................

  10. #10
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,911

    Re: The Need For Regulating Markets

    No need for more regulation. We need less regulation and give that extra money to the people who drive the economy. Regulation causes a chain reaction of in-balancing issues... requiring more and more. The governments job is just to inform the public about products and the market, NOT tell it how. Ingredient facts, safety, and legitimacy checks are what is needed and !Nothing! else. Business has a right to make an unsafe product, as long as it doesn't jeopardize the liberty of people who wish to avoid it, and as long as the government informs the people of whats standards the product did not pass.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •