Letting our banking system collapse and watching Great Depression II start is hardly a good move forward from that point.
Guess what? GD 2.0 will be worse because of the bailouts.
If you think they (both the current president, and the prior one) fixed anything by showering the same criminals who caused the original problem with money then you've got a reality distortion field rivaling Steve Job's.
Our "banking system" was never in danger. About half a dozen large banks are insolvent and should be bankrupt. The thousands of smaller, prudent banks could have picked up the pieces.
The important thing is to learn from past mistakes, not to let society go tits up because of an archaic and dogmatic transfer of survival of the fittest from the biological to the sociological realm.
Translation: "I fucked up, so now you are going to give me your money to help me fix it. I won't do it again, promise."
Greenspan thought, as Ayn Rand had taught him, that the self-interest of the bankers would keep them in check, but it didn't. Once one bank took the risks, and saw the immediate profits, the others had to follow suit, or see their value plummet.
You don't think the safety nets affected their decision making? No one does due diligance any more because they know the government will bail them out.
So in order to avoid panic we reward felons with bailouts instead of indictments? How is that more sane than bankrupting the bad actors and selling their assets to the banks that didn't get involved with mortgage fraud?
so why was it their responsibility to see through fraud schemes that even those with 'training' in the field couldn't (or wouldn't) grasp?
"wouldn't" is the correct answer. Too many people resort to magical thinking so they don't need to ponder questions like, "Is what I'm trying to do actually possible in a real, mathematical sense? (can housing prices really keep going up forever?)" Continually shifting the consequences for bad decision away from the people that made them will do nothing but exacerbate the problem.
Greenspan, for all the harm he did, actually believed that Ayn Rand crap would work.
It would have worked if he and Congress would have allowed the large banks to actually go bankrupt when they deserved it. Failure is the ultimate regulator, unfortunately the people who fund all the reelection campaigns in this country mysteriously became "too big to fail".
So does that mean that selling computers with Linux or OSX installed is illegal? Or will they get away with "installing" the software on those computers even though it can not function?
Don't blame corporate america - blame every single person who has bought into the stock market bubble (including everyone who has a 401K or IRA).
At one time people bought stocks based on their dividend yield. These people held on to the stocks for a long time and did not want the company to sacrifice the long term for the short term.
Now the market is dominated by speculators that want instant profits now. Stocks are no longer priced by the actual condition of the company and its long term outlook but by the "greater fool" theory.
The companies are just responding to what their owners are telling them.
Back in the 1800s there was this idea that all living things could be grouped into a neat, consistent classification system. As it turns out, reality isn't tidily organized like a giant clock.
There is a popular myth that it would be possible to list all taxonomic ranks. In reality there is an indeterminate number of ranks, as a taxonomist may invent a new rank at will, at any time, if he or she feels this is necessary. In doing so, there are some restrictions, which will vary with the Nomenclature Code which applies.
The problem, then, is whether to quantify the whole ring as a single species (despite the fact that not all individuals can interbreed) or to classify each population as a distinct species (despite the fact that it can interbreed with its near neighbours). Ring species illustrate that the species concept is not as clear-cut as it is often thought to be.
I am guessing you don't remember the dark ages before internet.
Microsoft did start an online service back before the internet was mainstream. It was called The Microsoft Network. Back in the bad old days, you had your local BBS, and a handful of national companies like AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy and MSN.
It's not like human beings haven't been drinking, doing drugs and flashing naughty bits since before recorded history. Only now we can create permanent, accessable records of all of it.
I won't argue that this is a good change, just that it is an inevitable one.
When the time comes that a Google search will find naked pictures of 1/5 (1/3, 1/2, 3/4) of the population then those activities will no longer be viewed in the same way that they are viewed today.
Never, ever, under any circumstance, allow yourself to be recorded while having sex, or even while displaying your naughty bits. Think about it: is a cheap necklace of mardi gras beads really worth the embarrassment of showing up in a "Girl geeks gone wild!" video?
If it's really true that 20% of all teenagers have sent naked pictures of themselves to another person's cellphone then in less than a generation it won't matter anymore.
Once a certain fraction of the population has naked pictures of themselves floating around the internet it will no longer be scandalous.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what? GD 2.0 will be worse because of the bailouts.
If you think they (both the current president, and the prior one) fixed anything by showering the same criminals who caused the original problem with money then you've got a reality distortion field rivaling Steve Job's.
Our "banking system" was never in danger. About half a dozen large banks are insolvent and should be bankrupt. The thousands of smaller, prudent banks could have picked up the pieces.
Translation: "I fucked up, so now you are going to give me your money to help me fix it. I won't do it again, promise."
You don't think the safety nets affected their decision making? No one does due diligance any more because they know the government will bail them out.
So in order to avoid panic we reward felons with bailouts instead of indictments? How is that more sane than bankrupting the bad actors and selling their assets to the banks that didn't get involved with mortgage fraud?
"wouldn't" is the correct answer. Too many people resort to magical thinking so they don't need to ponder questions like, "Is what I'm trying to do actually possible in a real, mathematical sense? (can housing prices really keep going up forever?)" Continually shifting the consequences for bad decision away from the people that made them will do nothing but exacerbate the problem.
It would have worked if he and Congress would have allowed the large banks to actually go bankrupt when they deserved it. Failure is the ultimate regulator, unfortunately the people who fund all the reelection campaigns in this country mysteriously became "too big to fail".
Now the censors know what they are missing.
What exactly is perverse about producing more than you consume? That's what a profit is, after all.
Colbertium
So does that mean that selling computers with Linux or OSX installed is illegal? Or will they get away with "installing" the software on those computers even though it can not function?
They were at the time that I registered. (a few years ago)
It wasn't at the time or I'd have registered it. Maybe someday I will get around to selling email addresses.
I registered fuckthenavy.net because .com and .org were taken.
Don't blame corporate america - blame every single person who has bought into the stock market bubble (including everyone who has a 401K or IRA).
At one time people bought stocks based on their dividend yield. These people held on to the stocks for a long time and did not want the company to sacrifice the long term for the short term.
Now the market is dominated by speculators that want instant profits now. Stocks are no longer priced by the actual condition of the company and its long term outlook but by the "greater fool" theory.
The companies are just responding to what their owners are telling them.
How sad is it when we start to talk about a presidential administration in those terms?
"Just think about all the hotels they didn't break in to."
"Don't worry, there are plenty of terrorists that received no weapons in exchange for hostages."
"At least he didn't let all of our soldiers get dragged through the streets of Mogadishu."
so I guess I am ineligible even if I wanted the job.
Back in the 1800s there was this idea that all living things could be grouped into a neat, consistent classification system. As it turns out, reality isn't tidily organized like a giant clock.
You could upload the information to Freenet.
Might be a little weak on the "reliable" criteria, though.
Or it could have been a slashcode or browser bug...
I am guessing you don't remember the dark ages before internet.
Microsoft did start an online service back before the internet was mainstream. It was called The Microsoft Network. Back in the bad old days, you had your local BBS, and a handful of national companies like AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy and MSN.
Eventually they all became ISPs.
Like it or not that is what is happening.
It's not like human beings haven't been drinking, doing drugs and flashing naughty bits since before recorded history. Only now we can create permanent, accessable records of all of it.
I won't argue that this is a good change, just that it is an inevitable one.
When the time comes that a Google search will find naked pictures of 1/5 (1/3, 1/2, 3/4) of the population then those activities will no longer be viewed in the same way that they are viewed today.
If it's really true that 20% of all teenagers have sent naked pictures of themselves to another person's cellphone then in less than a generation it won't matter anymore.
Once a certain fraction of the population has naked pictures of themselves floating around the internet it will no longer be scandalous.
The first 'M' is what differentiates MMORPGs from the old BBS games.
Look out! Someone is trying to hack your brainstem!
20.4 * 300,000,000 = 6,120,000,000
6,120,000,000 / 5 quadrillion metric tons = 0.0000001% that's, um, really scary...