OT: Geek/Tech/Entrepreneur Stuff to do in PHX

[keith smith]

Hold on to your hat Craig. You might be surprised what happens in the next few years.  Yes, your statement "Free market economics is now officially dead." is partially true.  But not for long.

The citizens are upset about what the government is doing and it shows in the tea parties and other actions.

I predict the return to smaller government and less government intervention, to include less taxes.

It is obvious you are at the left and I am a conservative and am on the right.

I think the conservatives will ultimately win out because the people are just plain fed up. 

It is about the people and what the people want.




------------------------
Keith Smith


--- On Sun, 8/2/09, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:

> From: Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com>
> Subject: Re: OT: Geek/Tech/Entrepreneur Stuff to do in PHX
> To: "Main PLUG discussion list" <plug-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
> Date: Sunday, August 2, 2009, 10:35 PM
> On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 21:43 -0700,
> Eric Cope wrote:
> >         I would examine
> the "free market" again. We are /not/ in a
> >         free market,
> >         and haven't even
> been close to one for a while. We never
> >         deregulated
> >         anything,
> indeed, the pages of regulation haven't decreased
> >         since Regan.
> >         Greenspan turned
> out to be one of the biggest
> >     
>    interventionists, only
> >         outdone by
> Bernanke. You can't blame the mess on bankers, if
> >         they didn't
> >         make those
> decisions someone else would have, and the outcome
> >         wouldn't
> >         have been any
> different (in other words, it is a symptom, not
> >         a cause).
> >         The problem
> stems from many central banks including our own
> >         Federal
> >         reserve cutting
> interest rates from 2001-2004 by (essentially)
> >         "printing"
> money. Since the housing market was one of the most
> >         regulated
> >         (that is to say,
> there were government-enforced lending
> >         standards and
> >         intervention my
> Fannie and Freddie), so people spent that new
> >         money on
> >         houses before
> anything else (Oil too, because energy is
> >         closely tied to
> >         the market),
> drove prices up, created a misallocation of
> >         capital
> >         disproportionate
> with consumer demand, and we crashed when not
> >         enough
> >         people could
> humanly gather the money to buy a new house at
> >         the price
> >         they were at.
> ----
> no, there was no growth in anything but property values
> because the
> stock market was stagnant. The housing bubble was driven by
> escalating
> prices driven by investor purchases of housing which was
> completely
> unsustainable. The economy of 2000 > 2006 was a false
> bubble of real
> estate growth.
> 
> To suggest that Greenspan was an interventionist means that
> you don't
> believe in his love for Ayn Rand and all of his efforts at
> deregulation.
> Things like deregulating the firewalls between banks and
> investment
> houses. You can find the origins of this in the
> Graham-Leach act of 1999
> which repealed the Glass-Steagall act. This was free market
> failure at
> its best. Free market thinking is about corporate failure.
> Free market
> economics is now officially dead.
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail
> settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>