1.) Who actually makes the rules?
2.)Regulatory capture.

5. Mixture of socialism and capitalism. If you are going to suggest that "true capitalism" doesn't exist then there must be some socialism involved asshole.

Oxymorons are for morons!

You also misrepresent my belief on the banking industry but misrepresentation is essential to the bullshit you spew.

_________________

Let's not shit up the thread anymore with your bad thoughts, like invading countries and then forcing them to pay us is OK because Clinton's staff said so in an email, of course it was a bad idea when Trump wanted to take Iraq's oil. again, can't make this stuff up, folks!

I didn't know that you took your shits in such pristine bathrooms.

_________________

Nothing contradictory about that.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

A mixed economy traditionally describes its components. Manufacturing, service, financial, consumption etc.

Anyways, socialism =/= wealth redistribution or saftey nets or large scale organization of labor as we see in Europe. At it's core it calls for the ownership of capital and production by the community, in theory and government in practice. We had more in common with that during the 1940's with the advent of the command war economy. I would say we now have a pretty heavily centrally planned economy, not by outward force, but by more subtle means.

There isn't, really. Hard to argue (hey!) when the foundations of one's thoughts is anchored to an incorrect definition of socialism and/or the failure to properly describe what ones definition of socialism is. That would have helped.

There is certainly a fine discussion to be had here. I'm hoping it materializes. So I'm going to dial back my righteous fury for this one.

When I read that article yesterday, I was pretty pissed off. However, I will agree somewhat with SG in the lack of any consequences isn't necessarily the fault of Capitalism. A lot of it is just our country's refusal to enforce any laws when it comes to the rich.

_________________

Did you see Tanden's emails to John Podesta? She'd go on and on about how Hillary was in danger because of populist uprisings and "anti-politicians," and Podesta was just like "yeah she's fine don't worry." It's like when you get owned by pouring your heart out at someone who just replies "k."

_________________

It is stories like these where you can see the lack of differences between right and left if you look hard enough and are honest.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

It is ironic that the government has taken more control of business and yet they also enforce much less control over bad business.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Are you retarded?

_________________

wtf

_________________

I'd like to hear some free market solutions. Or socialist solutions. Or communist solutions (thanks in advance, Tall Midget).

_________________

_________________
Elections have consequences.

I would think simply enforcing our current laws on fraud would be enough.

Though, a true free market solution would be if Wells Fargo could be sued and have to pay huge payouts to every person they harmed.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I wasn't laughing at you, Mike. DB is a bully who has bad taste in talk show hosts.

_________________

DB has gone off the D.E. (DEEP END)

All the hate, the anger, the rhetoric violence....only a matter of time before it manifests itself physically.

I think that perhaps an even more free market solution would be if consumers could sue Wells Fargo and there was no limited shareholder liability. If SomeGuy owns 25% of Wells Fargo, hold him personally responsible for the damages. I'll admit I haven't thought deeply about the consequences of such a system, but on the surface, it would certainly seem to make people more responsible in what companies they buy ownership in.

_________________

I will fix it.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

You wanna go?

_________________

would be a nice undercard for the Big Fan vs. FarveFan main event

A mixed economy is one in which there are some socialist/marxist/communist elements (whichever you prefer) and some capitalist elements. The United States particularly since the New Deal ever has pretty much had one. You are correct that pure capitalism has never really existed and definitely doesn't exist today. Any sector in which the means of production is controlled by govt in theory has to be socialist/marxist/communist. You can make the argument that pure socialism has never existed either. That is why most people simply conflate the three because to distinguish would be splitting hairs.


You are contradicting yourself if you suggest that the govt had neither capitalism nor a mixed economy during the 50's. that really isn't possible.

_________________

It might need to be a triple threat match with Me/SomeGuy/Long Time Guy. Lance Stephenson will be in my corner.

_________________

I can not understand why the DoJ isn't jumping all over these people? I mean if you give them a pass on HRC how can you condone a pass on this? If this is not a clear cut case of law breaking then I don't now what else would be except someone beating a puppy to death on live nation TV.

_________________
When I am stuck and need to figure something out I always remember the Immortal words of Socrates when he said:"I just drank what?"

Raw is War!

_________________

IIRC, it was Wells Fargo screaming the loudest about TARP & being forced into it, citing their stellar management & solid conservative financial footing. Figures.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

Since we're on the topic of Capitalism, I was thinking about a conversation I had with my wife recently. A couple weeks ago on a Saturday, we had gone out for breakfast and were on our way home. My wife said she wanted to go somewhere instead of going home. I was fine with that. So she starts listing options...

"Want to go to the mall?" "No"
"Want to go to Target?" "No"
"Want to go to Lowe's?" "No"

After her getting mad, I suggested that we grab the dog and go take a walk at the park.

"No," she said, "Let's just go home."

Do you know how bizarre it would be to people who aren't Americans that all her entertainment suggestions were to just go look at stuff to buy? I realize this isn't some revelation; for me, I just had this moment of clarity at how strange of a concept that is. And I'm not trying to be holier than thou... if she had suggested we go walk around Bass Pro Shops, I would have been all in.

_________________

"Window Shopping", i.e., going to look at shit you're not going to buy anytime soon if ever, has got to be one of the dumbest activities people engage in.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

That's fair, let me clarify my initial response to Ikesouth and maybe this will make more sense...he put forth the thought that it was because of a "mixed" economy in the 1950's that the middle class prospered so. i.e. capitalism and socialist elements were the factors in the explosive, albeit short lived, strength of the middle class. That's what I disagreed with. I believe we need to actually define what we're talking about concerning "socialism" before moving forward. In this context is it high tax rates and redistribution via transfer payment, services and national projects etc or the traditional clinical definition. If it's the former than I would need for you or Ike to lay out what you believe were the socialist-lite elements at play during the 50's. I'd say you'd be more accurate in saying LBJ took it closer to that mark with the Great Society and even more accurate from 2006 and on.