I don;t understand something.. how people support paying for things when we are so much in debt?? My guess would be one can only do it if they completely don't care about the future of this country.. where do we get the money?? just one simple question..

so, when are Chris Dodds and Barney Frank going to be tried for gross negligence?
Or at least when will be made to stand up and defend their actions or lack thereof?
NEVER, because government will NEVER find themselves responsible for anything..

Michail, they can be both
No, they can't. Regulation kills competition, period. You can't have both

"Я всегда привожу пример шведов - 9 миллионов"
.
все эти утопии типа социализма и анархизма могут работать только на small scale и в однонациональном обществе. в многорассовом обществе единства никогда не будет. поэтому весь этот бред равенства и братства не прокатит.
запусти сейчас в Швецию пату рысяч арабов да пол миллиона африканцев с филипинцами - накроется ентот ихний успешны социализьм медным тазом....

I said, negligent, not grossly negligent... or maybe just grosslyincompetent... I don't think they will be tried - neither will the GW's... But if we are to put anyone on trial, it should first be those who committed the offense, and then the ones who failed in their responsibilities or maybe just turned a blind eye.

Michail, even sports are both competetive and regulated - so we can and do have both.

***********.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM
Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown

Bush is out of the office, however THOSE VERY SAME PEOPLE who fucked it all up are still in the office, and still running the banking committee, and are writing MORE regulations that are just as bad ( actually much, much worse ) vs. the old once.

Социалистам всегда кажется, что они ПОЧТИ у цели. Еще один закон, еще одно регулирующее агенство, еще пару отличных правил - и все будет ОК, рынок будет competeitive and regulated. Это беспроигрышная стратегия, потому что после очередного обязательного краха социалист всегда объяснит, что вся беда от плохих regulations. Вот не доходит до них, что такие сложные системы в принципе НЕВОЗМОЖНО регулировать сверху...

I repeat, the problem is not with regulations, bit rather with those who either choose not to follow them or fail in their enforcement duties.

this is what people do who are supposed to be the "good regulators".. ;-) but how can someone blame them, they are just people - they want government high-paying jobs and some fun at work..(H)
The Securities and Exchange Commission is the sheriff of the financial industry, looking for crimes such as Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme,but a new government report obtained by ABC News has concluded thatsome senior employees spent hours on the agency's computers looking atsites such as naughty.com, skankwire and youporn as the financialcrisis was unfolding.

"These guys in the middle of a financialcrisis are spending their timelooking at prurient material on theInternet," said Peter Morici, aprofessor at the University of Maryland and former director of the Office of Economics at the U.S. International Trade Commission.
"It'sreckless, and indicates a contempt for the taxpayer and thetaxpayer'sinterest in monitoring financial markets," Morici said.

********abcnews.go.com/GMA/sec-pornography-employees-spent-hours-surfing-porn-sites/story?id=10452544

"I repeat, the problem is not with regulations, bit rather with those who either choose not to follow them or fail in their enforcement duties."
You don't get it. The economy is such a complicated system, with so many players, incomplete information, stochastic behavior, unknown factors, that NO administrative regulations will ever work as intended. This system can only be "regulated" based on the most basic principle of supply and demand. All other attemts will inevitably fail, as they always do

Michail, there is no system so complex that it can't and and shouldn't be regulated... although, I understand how it may seem that way to some.

based on the most basic principle of supply and demand
--------------------------------------------------------
if you take a basic economics course you will realize that this principle is not without it's flaws... hence the need for regulations.

"there is no system so complex that it can't and and shouldn't be regulated... "
Это просто великолепно! Лина, вы не не просто социалист, вы архи-супер-дупер-классический социалист! Вас можно цитировать, как пример standard socialist approach to economy! :-D

Michail, using your logic - this country is so huge, we shouldn't even bother with trying to secure our borders. Airport security missed the 9/11 bombers - lets do away with that too. What else should we get rid off?

Michael, this is EXACTLY the point..
Speaking mathematically markets are stochastic.. there is no predictability of outcome. Once you introduce a new variable ( like regulation ) the outcome is totally unpredictable.

Michail Vi yavno ne znaete nichego ni o sotziolizme, ni o kapitalizme, ni o ekonomike. :-)

unfortunately, mathematic models only work in the classroom, not in the real world.

"the outcome is totally unpredictable."
In the case of mortgage flop the outcome was totally predictable (and even predicted by few wise men). The government built a classicpositive feedback scheme that could only function, because there was an abundance of cheap fiat money, printed by the government

"this country is so huge, we shouldn't even bother with trying to secure our borders."
The task of border security is absolutely trivial comparing with task of "regulating" the economy.

Lol, there is always 2 sides of every trade, and guess what? one of those sides is always right.

Michail, regulating banks in an an attempt to deter and prevent fraud and corruption is not the same as regulating the economy.

mathematics does not work in the markets in the real world?
wow, you should really tell that to all the hedge funds who pay mid-6digit salaries to all those math PhDs :)

they NEVER work perfectly in a classroom, that's the nature of stochastic.. wow.. maybe it's time for u to brush-up on your math-economics courses.
they can only predict with some % probability ..
and to be "right" in am trade you should only be right about 51% of the time.
however when you do macro-decision (like policies ) you can't afford to only be right 51% of the time.. besides out government is really not that smart.

I said as perfectly - since the classroom is a better controlled environment than the real world.

"out government is really not that smart."
The current ones are absolutely sure they are the smartest guys in the world. They have even 2 Nobel laureates in administration :-D

who are calling not that smart?? ^o) people who graduated from Harvard??!! (tr) but the less they do, the less chance there is to screw up for them.. isn't it also simple math? :-)

"but the less they do, the less chance there is to screw up for them.. "
Исключено. Им очень хочется порулить

Примеров обществ в которых работает социализм - множество, но они все закрытые. Вот и всё

Or they have a mandatory military service for young men. Or they exist purely on their oil money, like Norway. *Or they live like there is no tomorrow, like Greece. *Or they soon will be outnumbered by *freedom loving Muslims like France, Great Britain, Sweden... *
Does not look like a great model to me

I have to ask this question here, since all my friends support social orientation of Obama's cabinet:
who of you owes a business and how does it go?
I do see the necessity to tax big corporations really high in order to give small businesses a tax relief, in order to survive.
Tax policy is not a penalty. Based on the %-age they still will get more money. However paying high taxes can be avoided by doing good deeds: sending your employees to schools, opening gyms, getting better environment, giving to charity, improving medical care, etc.
President Bush lowered taxes for businesses, that run outside of USA,using foreign labor, right before this crisis unfolded.
If we are living in the country, where business is based on competitions, why do we have here so big % of professional foreigns? May be because the main principle of the capitalism: equal opportunities, is not really realized in the country. Unless you are a genius, you can't get a good education without money.

who of you owes a business and how does it go?
I owe a small business. My accountant says that this year the federal taxes will be a bit less. However,the NY local taxes grow up (NY has democratic government). Moreover, recently new unreasonable taxes appear: for the use of public transportation, for example! The next step is to apply the taxes for swimming in the ocean, etc.

From the personal point of view I easily see how tea attack against the banks influence common people: the cash rewards for the use of credit cards went down (from 3-5% to 1.1% for Chase), Citi applied the annual fee for its credit card that I had for 6 years, and I had to close it. The overdraft payments increased. Since I have no experience in late payments, I cannot say that the interest paid to banks grew up, but I won't surprise to hear about that. These are a few results of Obama-like activity.

I own my business, a perfect example of a small business. I run it, doing everything: from typesetting my own brochures, to buying supplies, to dispatching and taking orders. I have about 12 people working for me, depending on the season. Some in the office, some on the road.
When evil, evil, Mr. Bush had his stimulus program and sent checks to people, I expanded my business to have an on-line grocery store, with the money that came from extra business. Now, the business is at its worst ,since we started it in 1995. I don't know where Obama's programs are working, but here, in Queens, NY, they are not. My customers simply don't have the money to afford my services, many are unemployed.
If Obama goes for big corporations and will tax them more, they will move out of USA completely, leaving millions of people jobless, and killing small guys like me.
But, hey, your friends don't thinks so. Yes you can!

I do see the necessity to tax big corporations really high in order to give small businesses a tax relief, in order to survive.
Tax policy is not a penalty

Valentina, I feel that you are contradicting yourself. Taxing big corporations for the sheer fact of being big sounds exactly like a penalty for doing more business, hiring more employees, having higher income, etc. to me.

Don't you see how this artificial manipulation of businesses will cause the chain reaction (exactly how Oleg describes it) that will in the end hurt the small businesses?

By taxing the large corps. too much the government discourages them from growing the business i.e. hiring more people, spending more money with their vendors, etc. This has a negative downstream effect on smaller businesses and the rest of the economy.

Valentina, unfortunately people who support Obama have very little understanding of economics. Even Obama's economists have wrong understanding of economics. They are mostly driven by ideology, not science. It's a very sad and scary truth.
There tons ( TONS!) of data and graphs showing an inverse relationship between taxation and economic growth. The higher the taxes, the slower the economic growth. It may seem counterintuitive to Obama supporters that lowering taxes will actually bring more money to the government. if they could just understand that axiome , the crisis would be over long time ago.
America has second highest corporate tax in the wolrd! Do your Obamunist friends know that? If it's raised even higher, what fool will want to do business in US? Why would they do business here, if they can do it in so many other countires wich lower their corporate taxes to lure businesses? ( Think Hong Kong, for instance)

Valentina, unfortunately people who support Obama have very little understanding of economics.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
well, then that's at least one thing they have in common with those who oppose him.
__________________________________________________ __
It may seem counterintuitive to Obama supporters that lowering taxeswill actually bring more money to the government. if they could justunderstand that axiome , the crisis would be over long time ago.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
and then we would live happily ever after. the end.
the brilliance of simplistic logic.

America has second highest corporate tax in the wolrd! Do your Obamunist friends know that?
------------------------------------------------------------
you're letting your ignorance show again.
"Ostensibly, the U.S. federal tax code requires corporations to pay 35 percent of their profits in income taxes.

But of the 275 Fortune 500 companies that made a profit each year from 2001 to 2003 and for which adequate information to draw conclusions is publicly available, only a small proportion paid federal income taxes anywhere near that statutory 35 percent tax rate. The vast majority paid considerably less.

In fact, in 2002 and 2003, the average effective tax rate for all of these 275 companies was less than half the statutory 35 percent rate. Over the 2001-2003 period, effective tax rates ranged from a low of -59.6 percent for Pepco Holdings to a high of 34.5 percent for CVS."

"Over the three-year period, the average effective rate for all 275 companies dropped by a fifth, from 21.4 percent in 2001 to 17.2 percent in 2002-2003.
The statistics are startling:
Eighty-two of the 275 companies, almost a third of the total, paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2001 to 2003. In the years they paid no income tax, these companies earned $102 billion in pretax U.S. profits. But instead of paying $35.6 billion in income taxes as the statutory 35 percent corporate tax rate seems to require, these companies generated so many excess tax breaks that they received outright tax rebate checks from the U.S. Treasury, totaling $12.6 billion. These companies' "negative tax rates" meant that they made more after taxes than before taxes in those no-tax years."