a) read the newspaper,

or

b) have lunch?

Aside from that the FDIC temporarily takes over banks almost every weekend lately, and that there has never been a real free market in any realm (without government-backed regulations favoring the politically dominant side at the time), will you go without our “socialized” police & fire departments, air-traffic controllers, and all the other examples? We will continue tweaking our mixed system, some more regulation here, some less there, as our experience leads us to. The entire “capitalist” financial industry has been indelibly shamed by their failing us all. See, for example, Michael Edesess’ blog http://www.thebiginvestmentlie.com/

The Bill of Rights gives us the right to bear arms. If somebody is going to mug you or steal from you, you figure it out ahead of time and then just shoot them. That solves the problem and it means that they won’t bother other people in the future. It also should act as a pretty good deterrent.

It worked well in the western US until they started messing it up by sending in US Marshalls and the like which caused the system to be less efficient and less stable. Self-regualtion seemed to work well in distributing water and grazing rights in the 1800s. Today, it seems to be working well in most inner cities where the police don’t like to go in, so the population can regulate themselves.

It is a logical extension to assume that the same concepts would work well in the financial markets where the people are much more civilized, have much less larceny in their hearts, and are far more rational than the average citizen.

“TEMPORARY government takeover of banks”

Temporary ~ that’s rich.

It takes an extraordinary amount of willful ignorance to deduce that socialism (which has never worked anywhere) is preferable to capitalism (which has produced among the most vibrant economies the world has ever known).

An interesting side-effect from this socialist experiment for you to analyze:

Yesterday I went to buy a toaster, and they gave me a free bank!

Mission accomplished ~ I suppose…

Not to veer towards socialism here, but your post about the Reagan era reminded me how many of the same people who want completely unregulated markets would also argue that we need the death penalty, stiffer sentencing for minor crimes and unlimited personal weapons rights for their crime-deterrent value …. I find this amusingly ironic ….

Nearly all of their actions since taking over the reign have indicated that they have not. I have yet to decide whether this is due to:

A) a real belief in market self stabilization, with a nudge from tax dollars belonging to those most impacted by, but least responsible for the crisis

B) decades of effective marketing against government intervention that primarily benefits the masses has caused real political fear of being labeled as “socialists”.

Of course, the modern day epithet comes from the very people who created and benefited from the environment that led to the collapse of the financial markets to begin with — and who embrace (or rather, extort) the current transfer of wealth from the *masses* to the *few* — in order to return to a system that remains much the same as before.

or C) we’re being duped. Purposefully.

Finally, a strong and stable financial system is the most important element to assure the safety, survival and growth of our nation. Even more important than our military itself, because without the former the latter cannot exist. So why is it that it would be seen as absurd and downright irresponisible to leave oversight and control of our military in the hands of private enterprise, yet the same does not apply to financial institutions?

If a hypothetical discussion could cause such devastation, what does it say about the stability of the system. In the late 90s, her adversaries already knew how little it would take to rock the world.