So everybody's stupid and dishonest, that's why the economy is in turmoil, so "we" need to regulate it some more, so "that can never happen again." (Where have I heard that one before?) As investment bankers are apparently stupid and reckless, they need to be restrained by force, so that the government can fix the economy by fraud.
"Regulation" is nothing but barefaced aggression by government thugs against consenting adults doing business with each other. But unabashed use of force is not the only weapon in the arsenals governments (i.e., criminals elected by mobs of idiots and bums) bring to bear on the economy (i.e., on all productive people). Simple caveman force is accompanied by the most complex forms of fraud, like deficit spending that has to be recouped some day either by force (like taxes or tariffs) or more fraud, like printing "money" (i.e., worthless paper instead of real money, which is a commodity with real-world uses like gold or silver).
As I pointed out before, the government is to blame for at least half of the turmoil going on right now. But of course, even in a totally free, capitalist country without any government, there would be periods of boom and bust — as long as human beings aren't omniscient and perfect.
So consenting adults doing business with each other get high on irrational exuberance, causing a boom. When they see the error of their ways, irrational exuberance collapses into the hangover of irrational mistrust, causing a bust. Well, what do you expect from a system where billions of less than perfect people interact, everyone of them acting on imperfect information?
Stock speculation is nothing but gambling. Ever heard,
A Random Walk down Wall Street? If you want to be on the safe side, you got to be a long-term investor.
But how in hell can the government clowns and the morons that elect them make themselves believe that they are honest, intelligent, or perfect enough to know what everybody else should do, to the point of initiating the use of force? If people are too stupid and dishonest to be permitted to engage in voluntary, unregulated trade with each other, how can they be wise and honest enough to elect those who will be authorized to force everyone how to do business?
In the olden days, the people had a monarch. It was believed that through his breeding and training, he would be the man who could be trusted to order everyone else around.
The result was general starvation and misery. Naturally, a monarch is the result of utter disregard for genetics, the product of a distinguished long line of incest ensuring the greatest ass possible, sure to come up with the dumbest decisions possible.
Nowadays, we are more enlightened. We elect our dictators. Yet we retain the warranty that our rulers remain the greatest possible asses, even though they're not the products of incest (maybe excepting the Palins). If "we" are stupid, how can we hope to elect anybody who's not stupid?
You say, Main Street can and should be trusted to rule Wall Street? Because the Jesus freaks on Main Street and the selfless silver spoon socialists on the Upper East Side are less greedy and dishonest than those godless, egoistic "Wall Street Jews"? (Yes, that's what those fascist Jesus freaks are calling bankers again. Just Google it if you don't believe me.)
If so, then they're more stupid, too. Just look at the scum they propose to elect to enforce either
national socialism or national
socialism. The Jesus freaks: McAlzheimer and the Palindrome. The silver spoon socialists: Barrack Hussein Osama and the Bidet. Neither McAlzheimer and the Palindrome nor Osama and the Bidet would be fit to run a moose burger joint.
Did you never notice that in fact the average politician or regulator is always more stupid than the average businessman? Well, that's democracy.
It's a basic law of nature that you cannot get more information out of a system than is in it. Ever tried to blow up a pixelated photo?
Accordingly, elected politicians will be as dumb as or dumber than the average of the electorate. (Barring aberrations, like when the mob underestimates a candidate).
The difference between capitalism and democracy is that under democracy every individual, irrespective of his or her stupidity, has an equal vote. In capitalism, the more intelligent individual tends to be more productive, thus tends to be richer, thus tends to own more stock, thus tends to have more votes at the shareholders' meeting.
That does not mean that capitalism is perfect. Just think worthless heirs.
As most people are stupid to some degree, even capitalism can only mitigate that general stupidity of humanity. Yet, on average, any action undertaken by a capitalist corporation will be more rational and successful than any action concocted by a democratic government.
In the context of today's economy, any action by governments can only make matters worse. The only rational thing to do is to wait for people to overcome their irrational fears and start trusting and lending each other again.
And while we still have democracy, not capitalism, you can of course vote for
Bob Barr. Sock it to the collectivist McAlzheimer-Palindrome-Osama-Bidet cabal.
Posts
