Forums

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
And that has what to do with how the SEC balances the interests of businesses and investors?

I thought the subject who is more free market the Dems or the Repubs. You said that SEC was not requlating enough. My point was that it is better to err on the side of less regulation than too much regulation.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I have much respect for Cox, but he has strong views about the securities regulation that make me, as an investor, concerned. Setting aside what you know about Cox personally, have you not seen any of the coverage about why Bush dumped Donaldson and picked Cox? I'm talking about the business press here.

Whatever the press says, I think that the Republican are more free market when it comes to regulation. Cox's appointment supports that position.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop Of some Democrats, maybe. But not all Republicans are Christian fundamentalists, either, as I'm sure you appreciate..

True - but I would rather share my party with fundamentalists than with socialists.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop What you have here is a set of Chamber of Commerce talking points, but telling me that small business owners who are active in the GOP want tort reform is a long, long way from establishing that trial lawyers are a major threat to the free market. Try again.

I think small business owners, be on the front lines, are the best judges of what the biggest threat is to the running of their business profitably. If they tell me litigation. I believe them. Their biggest foe is the Trial lawyers. It is easy to be an armchair quarterback, but when the soldier in the field tells you what the biggest problem is you had better listen.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop OK, and likewise businesses support an awful lot of measures that are harmful to competition even as they serve the narrow self-interest of those businesses. ?

Wrong - specific industries may support a lot of anticompetitive stuff, but the business community in aggregate supports what is best for business. In other words what is best for growth.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop Government should strike a balance between the interests of labor and capital. A government that errs too far to either side (e.g., California state government, and the current federal government) will give us less than optimum markets.?

The government should support what creates the most growth. Business want to grow and like a growing economy. Unions don't care about growth or a growing economy. They just care about protecting the jobs of the members of their unions.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop Privatizing Social Security has very little to do with whether market participants are able to transact freely with each other. .?

Wrong - it is about whether the government or you is the best person to decide what to do with the money you have earned.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop It's about whether consumers are able to obtain a sort of social insurance that the market is unable to provide.

You don't think the private market can provide a better system than Social Security. How much are you depending on social security for your retirement?

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop People like Social Security. It's a funny sort of free-market doctrine that tries to tell people that they can't have a government program they overwhelmingly support.

So if in a democracy, if the people decide to nationalize all industry, that is really free market doctrine? Free Market doctrine is very different than majority rules.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop You have the current crop of Republicans and their drunken-sailor spending policies to thank for the deficits..

And the Dems have such a strong record of balancing budgets. Remember it took the election of a Republican congress in 1994 to stop the red ink that had been going on since the last time the Repubicans held the Congress.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop I have a hard time faulting the GOP for rising oil prices, but would not that both prongs of the Admininstration's energy policy vis-a-vis oil -- invading Iraq and drilling in ANWR -- are terrible policy.?

As far as drilling in ANWAR - do you think increased supply is going to raise oil prices?

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop On health-care, please go back and compare the GOP drug benefit to the (cheaper, and more effective) alternative the Dems were pushing. The GOP plan was all about subsidizing big pharma -- exactly the sort of corporate giveaway that your party is now all about. Meanwhile, they have no plan to do anything about health care costs..?

Health Care costs in the hands of the Democrats will bring down costs. I just don't buy it.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop And the next time we meet, I'll see if you can tell me with a straight face that Republicans are just as interested as Democrats in forcing companies to properly fund pension plans.

What has this got to do with how free the market is. I will tell you with a straight face that Republicans are much more pro free market than Dems.