Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
God help me, but here I go.
Are you fucking nuts? I can see a sane person arguing that, once the New Deal went into effect, combined with the growth of federal government during WWII, the market was "gelded" -- but what, exactly, regulation are you talking about here? Because in my view, there was none.
The Supremes held that the freedom of contract protected the rights of 8 year olds to work in textile mills. There was no central bank -- private enterprise almost bankrupted the federal government by a market corner on gold during the late 19th Century, and JP Morgan -- out of the goodness of his heart (and enlightened self-interest) bailed the government out of a panic (as depressions/recessions used to be called). Henry Frick used machine guns on his workers.
That's a different argument. Which ones fall into the 9/10th?
|
You're unfamiliar with the other Roosevelt's work? His trust busting marked the emergence of the govt as the proactive market regulator.
There was and will always be a need to run to the court to redress gross improprieties like child labor. But when the pendulum shifts to the point that we have people suing over predatory lending on the theory a person intelligent enough to attend a closing is too stupid to understand what he's signing, we've certainly come too far in the other direction. We're at an extreme pendulum shift where the notion of utilizing the govt - by both business and those who'd seek to have it give thm others' wealth - is overtaking the notion of finding away to do it yourself. Hyper-regulation is part of that universe.
Think of it like a basketball game with hair trigger refs. It's shitty, right? Everybody's always at the line. That's what people are like these days. Suing, or running to get a rule somewhere to shove in someone's face, or calling a lobbyist to get some law passed for you, is too much an accepted instrument. That shit should be safe, legal and rare.
Threaded Mode