BAILOUT: Yes or No?

[Mangudai]

then let's get into the ownership society. Whose deal is that?

It's both parties. The "ownership society" has been promoted by both parties.

1994 changes in regulation of employee stock options were a major cause of the 2002 downturn. We had incentives in place to inflate stock prices rather than actual earnings. Dems favored generous employee stock options, to give workers a share of their company. Republicans liked the idea too in 1994, they finally fixed it.

According to US generally accepted accounting principles in effect before June 2005, stock options granted to employees did not need to be recognized as an expense on the income statement when granted, although the cost was disclosed in the notes to the financial statements. This allows a potentially large form of employee compensation to not show up as an expense in the current year, and therefore, currently overstate income. Many assert that over-reporting of income by methods such as this by American corporations was one contributing factor in the Stock Market Downturn of 2002.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_stock_option



http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Who was pushing home ownership beyond any rational limits?

[Koga No Goshi]

It's both parties. The "ownership society" has been promoted by both parties.

1994 changes in regulation of employee stock options were a major cause of the 2002 downturn. We had incentives in place to inflate stock prices rather than actual earnings. Dems favored generous employee stock options, to give workers a share of their company. Republicans liked the idea too in 1994, they finally fixed it.

I agree Clinton was crap. "Centrist" as the Republicans would say, or "Republican" as my brand of Dem would say, on economic issues. But, that was 14 years ago. 1994 was FOURTEEN YEARS AGO, even if Clinton feels like yesterday to people. So I still fail to see how posters like CR can legitimately convince themselves that after 2 terms of FULL Republican control, this is all the fault of Democrats, or even primarily so would be a stretch in my mind. The bar here seems to be, the Dems need to do everything correctly the first time, and fix anything wrong that the excesses of greed or corporate influence that inhabit the Rep party might try to slip in here and there, because we can't count on the Reps to do crap but line pockets and pick their nose. That is the message I'm getting out of people like CR who claim to be SO against the conditions that enabled all of this, while his political party sat in control for the last 8 years. Clearly he and his party have a difference in opinion as to whether or not regulation or deregulation was needed.

Again, goin back to page 1... deregulation has been the mantra of the GOP since Reagan. All these fake protests now, after the fact, about how McCain or the Republicans or the GOP or this or that or so and so's friend George "talked about better control of the financial industry" isn't worth the paper it was never printed on.

[Ronin]

it´s funny....because it´s true

[Mangudai]

Again, goin back to page 1... deregulation has been the mantra of the GOP since Reagan. All these fake protests now, after the fact, about how McCain or the Republicans or the GOP or this or that or so and so's friend George "talked about better control of the financial industry" isn't worth the paper it was never printed on.

You're oversimplifying in the extreme. Nobody is against all regulation, and nobody is for every conceivable regulation. The main divide is that republicans favor only regulation to protect the public safety, democrats also favor regulation to distort price incentives to promote the interests of the underprivileged.

Reagan style deregulation was extremely successful. Here are two important examples:

http://www.econlib.org/Library/Enc/T...egulation.html

The Motor Carrier Act of 1935 required new truckers to seek a "certificate of public convenience and necessity" from the ICC. Truckers already operating in 1935 could automatically get certificates, but only if they documented their prior service, and the ICC was quite restrictive in interpreting proof of service. New trucking companies, on the other hand, found it extremely difficult to get certificates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_Deregulation_Act

Since 1937, the federal Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) had regulated all domestic air transport as a public utility, setting fares, routes, and schedules. The CAB promoted air travel, for instance by generally attempting to hold fares down in the short-haul market, to be subsidized by higher fares in the long-haul market. The CAB also was obliged to ensure that the airlines had a reasonable rate of return. It also earned a reputation for bureaucratic complacency; airlines were subject to lengthy delays when applying for new routes or fare changes, which were not often approved.

We used to have crap like that in all sorts of industries. Thanks to Reagan style deregulation most of it is gone now.

India's economy was known as the "permit raj" because it required licensing for all sorts of activities. India has "liberalized" (republican style) their economy, and they are taking off.

China is totally different. Their regulation has more to do with personal relationships and less to do with written codes. Their model sucks.

[Koga No Goshi]

You're oversimplifying in the extreme. Nobody is against all regulation, and nobody is for every conceivable regulation. The main divide is that republicans favor only regulation to protect the public safety, democrats also favor regulation to distort price incentives to promote the interests of the underprivileged.

I absolutely am not, in the context of Republican control for the last 8 years and CR's insane piecemealed tack-on arguments to say this is all the fault of Democrats and minorities and "liberal pet projects." If Republicans believe there can be good regulation (debatable, especially considering the GOP's voting record), and also believed that Freddie and Fannie and the financial market needed it, nothing stopped them from sitting on their hands for 8 years and then, when the whole thing exploded, blaming it on Democrats. What great leaders on this issue.

And, your characterization of the differences is very inadequate. The kinds of regulations various different Democrats may support can run the gamut and frequently DO cover issues like safety and public health, rather than just some imaginary oppress-the-whites pro-minority advocacy you seem to be implying. The only consistency, whatsoever, to what Republicans seem to support when it comes to corporations, laws, and regulation, is what's profitable for corporations who have significantly contributed to the current GOP congress, the GOP politicians up for re-election, or the present GOP administration. Iraq, for instance... stories about septic contamination of water the troops are receiving from private contractors connected with Cheney. Yes, I see the attention to care and safety there that you say Republicans support regulation for. Everything else, from checking social security numbers of employees to try to catch illegal immigrants, to minimum wages, to safety inspections (mine cave-in's of the last few years), is very expendable depending on who didn't want it, whose profit it hurts, and if that industry happened to give a lot of money to GOP politicians.

[Mangudai]

You're oversimplifying in the extreme. Nobody is against all regulation, and nobody is for every conceivable regulation. The main divide is that republicans favor only regulation to protect the public safety, democrats also favor regulation to distort price incentives to promote the interests of the underprivileged.

And, your characterization of the differences is very inadequate. The kinds of regulations various different Democrats may support can run the gamut and frequently DO cover issues like safety and public health, rather than just some imaginary oppress-the-whites pro-minority advocacy you seem to be implying.

Your logic is inadequate. I said something like Alice only likes apples, and Bob also likes bananas.
Bob might like apples, oranges and pears. Alice does not like anything except apples.