Thread: Understanding the Stimulus Bill

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Soy,

Call it what you choose, but as I said in some other thread all these things bring us one step closer to socialism.

True, one step closer, but wouldn't you say a balanced government would be the best government?

You see it as one step closer, I see it as one step closer out of a total of 1000 steps from full blown communism.

Originally Posted by SoySoldier

Originally Posted by jmw_man

And you did a good thing, but since the bank down the street gave him the loan, then that bank is part of the problem.

Ding ding ding!

But also, the banks are allowed to give loans to people who can't afford them...that seems likebegging for trouble. But again, the bank can look good because it has all these loans worth of interest out there to put on paper...maximal output for minimal input.

A site describing ACORN...

http://www.homeloanbasics.com/articl...ageAssistance/

If you feel your income is too low or your credit is too damaged to ever be able to qualify for a home loan, think again!

Why not rent? The American Dream is becoming a nightmare.

Originally Posted by jmw_man

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Soy,

Call it what you choose, but as I said in some other thread all these things bring us one step closer to socialism.

True, one step closer, but wouldn't you say a balanced government would be the best government?

You see it as one step closer, I see it as one step closer out of a total of 1000 steps from full blown communism.

I would prefer to keep what liberties and freedoms I have, and hope that others are responsible enough that they will allow that as opposed to having the federal government decide what I am responsible enough to do.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Soy,

Call it what you choose, but as I said in some other thread all these things bring us one step closer to socialism.

We have never been a free market, the Soviet Union was never a communism. It is always a sliding scale. And when we let the market decide, there is fallout, as we are experiencing. Likewise, complete government regulation has problems too (as the former Soviet Union can attest to). So while I see your point, I do not think that if there is a little more regulation of the market in the US by our government we will suddenly have the thought police telling us what we can or cannot believe. One just simply does not lead to the other. Look at China, in order to succeed they had to become less regulated, but they will never be the free market we are. Likewise, we succeeded, and we are not the regulated system they are. Nor are we completely free market. If we were, gas would cost more ALL the time and there would be less meat because corn would not have a price floor.

The problem with saying the if we let gays marry each other, than people will marry horses next, is that there is no logical chain to support that. One does mean the other is going to happen. That is why the slippery slope is a fallacy, it proves nothing.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

This is no different to me than all the people that sued the tobacco industry over getting cancer. It is a freaking death stick you stuck in your face, of your own free will, for however long you chose. Nobody made you smoke, so don't blame them when you can't breathe, get cancer, or die.

Nobody made these people get a credit card, buy a car, a home, a boat, or whatever else. What did? Their own personal greed. You can make all the laws you want, but you can't outlaw greed, selfishness, pride, ego, or any other emotions or character traits.

That's a good argument.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

We all agree that people screwed up. The only place we differ is in who is responsible. Last time I checked I am only responsible for myself, partly my wife, and my kids. You seem to think the government, corporate America, your friends, your neighbor, and whomever else you want to pin it on is responsible for you, and I can't agree to that. if I buy a house that is too expensive I have nobody to blame but myself.

That is too. I don't know how to argue with the first but I can say that personally, I feel like I'm 100% responsible for myself, I will never blame anybody but myself should something like this were to happen to me. Luckily, I work in a field with more job security than most others.

The only argument I can make is that we are not in a balanced government right now. We are so capitalistic in our ways that we are destined to fail. A full blown communist/socialist government would be destined to fail as well. In a "balanced" government, I believe we would have more checks and balances to everything.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

We all agree that people screwed up. The only place we differ is in who is responsible. Last time I checked I am only responsible for myself, partly my wife, and my kids. You seem to think the government, corporate America, your friends, your neighbor, and whomever else you want to pin it on is responsible for you, and I can't agree to that. if I buy a house that is too expensive I have nobody to blame but myself.

Which is why we are required to sign things with a signature. Basically it says "I know what the hell I am getting into." Sorry, but I didn't buy a home, take out a mortgage or run a company into the ground, so why should my tax dollars go to bail these people out? Yeah it will be a shitty time for everyone while the economy recovers and the US might not be the shining country 'on top' but there are a lot of other countries not 'on top' that do just fine.

Try to be Rome and you will fall.

eeekk, I better get back to work, wish I could continue this discussion, hopefully I'll be back later.

I look at people that get foreclose on, just one example, and say THEY never should have borrowed so much.

Others look at it and say THE GOVERNMENT should never have allowed THE BANK to loan so much to them.

Sam problem-foreclosure, same solution-don't borrow too much, only difference is responsibility. Just like outlawing guns of some types won't stop people from killing each other, outlawing certain loans will not keep people from being financially dumb.

Originally Posted by jmw_man

The only argument I can make is that we are not in a balanced government right now. We are so capitalistic in our ways that we are destined to fail. A full blown communist/socialist government would be destined to fail as well. In a "balanced" government, I believe we would have more checks and balances to everything.

I don't think we are balanced either. I believe we have become so centralized in government that the economy itself has followed suit and thus we have the current situation. Localized banks didn't fail, nor did a large majority of local businesses. Why can we not have a more localized government? The 10th amendment to the constitution was written for this.

Right now our tax dollars go into one huge federal pot and get spooned out to the states and then down to the local governments. I have never understood why we arent geared more towards the state and lower level. When I know that my tax dollars are the ones being spent to fill the pothole on my street, it makes me a lot less upset than it going into a pool that might end up being spent on a park somewhere else in the country I will never use.

Civil, would you lend money to someone (not a friend in need or a family member, but a complete stranger) who was likely to not pay it back?

(I am assuming no)

Exactly, so why did the bank (or other lending firm) do it?

It is business, and now they potentially have that much more income in the future.

So maybe the blame should be on the bank (firm)?

But the economy is riding (partially) on all these banks and their investment power.

So who is to protect us, from the bank's (firm's) bad decision to lend out money?

Government regulation. Because the government's job is to protect us.

Now it does not have to go too far, just far enough to prevent these businesses (and their externalities; like the cost of those who cannot repay after the firm gave them their product (the loan)) from loaning to people who might cause this to happen.

Idiots are everywhere. It may not be our job to take care of them, but we pay the price anyway. I say we minimize that price and invest in reducing the number of idiots through good public education and redefining the "American dream."

Or, for another slippery slope,

Let's do away with government: Police ourselves, live off the land, defend our homes, heal our sick, make our own infrastructure, build our own cars, synthesize our own medicine, develop our own technology, etc.

It can only go so far, and even in our economic turmoil our lifestyle is superior to most of the world. We enjoy it in large part because our government can help provide for enough people that they have time to do things like make corporations, banking systems, etc. If everyone were busy fending for themselves, we would not be here on TTP playing games and bickering about stimulus packages.

The government protects us and provides infrastructure. Our system, our market, works in such a way that idiots can and do affect us all, the government can help protect ME from THOSE idiots.