Because it doesn't always work.

DamnYankees: Because it doesn't always work.

Because it sucks.

Most educated people realized capitalism isn't perfect.

I lost money in the stock market last year. It sucked initially, but you get to deduct part of your losses and it brought my income level down enough to where I qualified for the federal stimulus. See, when capitalism fails, socialism brings me back. I love America

Because it rewards greed.

Because you masturbated.

Perhaps there will be some REGULATION of OUR MONEY if the government doesn't just turn a blind eye to the crooks this time around.

/assuming there is anything left to regulate, that is
//thank you again Bush Admin!

DubyaHater: See, when capitalism fails, socialism brings me back. I love America

People these days have such convoluted definitions of capitalism and socialism, it's impossible to believe that there is any intellectual honesty in the debate.

We are, at our core, a capitalist society. Over the years, we have implemented specific and precise socialist ideas to help mitigate the negative effects of capitalism. 40-hour work week? Socialist. Minimum wage? Socialist. Child-protective labor laws, and workplace safety in general? Socialist. Unemployment insurance? Socialist.

If we have to adopt a model that protects a fundamental institution in our economic structure by using socialist tactics, so be it. It wouldn't be the first time.

ole prophet: Because it rewards greed.

The problem of social organization is how to set up an arrangement under which greed will do the least harm, capitalism is that kind of a system. -- Milton Friedman

The power to do good is also the power to do harm. -- Milton Friedman

Because it is our only hope of not becoming a 3rd world country. Got to keep up those standards of living. We don't want the "poor" to suffer. Good luck with that.

bacccc: Perhaps there will be some REGULATION of OUR MONEY if the government doesn't just turn a blind eye to the crooks this time around.

/assuming there is anything left to regulate, that is
//thank you again Bush Admin!

YOUR money?

That's the fundamental flaw of your idea. That shouldn't be YOUR money, it should either belong to the government, or one of the major contributors for the powers that be.

because naked rampant capitalism is about as viable as naked rampant communism?

because it does not and never has existed?

Well, most intelligent people don't masturbate to the idea that some "invisible hand" does everything. Now don't get me wrong market forces are a good thing to have, but rampant chaos like in the 1920s where everybody just lets the market do as it pleases and eventually become it's own undoing, that not good either.

ole prophet: Because it rewards greed.

Greed is good. It is the driver of ambition, efficiency, and innovation.

You can make a case that capitalism needs to be regulated, but saying greed is not a beneficial force in the economy is wrong.

I've been saying this for months now. But the politicians in Washington are either too pussified to do the right thing (see Obama Administration) or too ideological and dumb to see that this is the right thing to do (Congressional Republicans).

ole prophet: Because it rewards greed.

Because it rewards productivity.

That said, anything "too big to fail" needs to be nationalized or allowed to fail.

The system only works if failing has consequences. Let the banks that farked-up fail. If they cannot fail, the shenanigans will grow exponentially. The dems love shenanigans and money, making the bank bail-outs are the ultimate scenario for the power hungry weasels.

Its Tea Party time

worlds tallest midget: The system only works if failing has consequences. Let the banks that farked-up fail. If they cannot fail, the shenanigans will grow exponentially. The dems love shenanigans and money, making the bank bail-outs are the ultimate scenario for the power hungry weasels.

i have two answers for this:

1) Contrary to the Republican talking points, Obama is trying to save capitalism by propping up the banking industry, until it can stand by itself.

2) Capitalism is great in theory, but not so much in reality.

Capitalism is a wonderful ideal to strive for, but in reality, it needs rules, regulations and laws to prevent it from being abused. Not everyone will live up to the ideal and not everyone can be honest and resist temptation to break the ideals because they are human. People can become corrupt. Pure Capitalism would only work if we were all robots.

Capitalism is an antique economic philosophy built around the production of goods- something that Americans haven't done in years. Socialism, with its built in mechanisms for causing privation and starvation, at least is able to operate in a reality where no one in the economy actually does anything.

The thing that drives me bananas is this, the US ALREADY nationalizes banks on a regular basis. The difference being they are smaller banks, but the policy of nationalizing, stabilizing and reprivitizing banks is a policy that this government has supported through many administrations. Not to mention that we also direct the IMF to do this in countries with banking issues. The hesitancy to do this in this situation is not based on facts its based on illogical talking head fear of the socialism boogie man. It is ridiculous and it is costing our nation dearly. Yes I am looking at you Glen.

We need a new system. One that rewards the innovative and hard working but provides for the stupid and lazy. Whoever comes up with that will win a Nobel Prize.

It is not new that economists favor takeovers, following the example of Sweden which got through a similar crisis at low cost. Link (new window)

tartie_pants: The thing that drives me bananas is this, the US ALREADY nationalizes banks on a regular basis. The difference being they are smaller banks, but the policy of nationalizing, stabilizing and reprivitizing banks is a policy that this government has supported through many administrations. Not to mention that we also direct the IMF to do this in countries with banking issues. The hesitancy to do this in this situation is not based on facts its based on illogical talking head fear of the socialism boogie man. It is ridiculous and it is costing our nation dearly. Yes I am looking at you Glen.

Umm... aside from USAA, which banks are already nationalized?

spnartie: Well, most intelligent people don't masturbate to the idea that some "invisible hand" does everything. Now don't get me wrong market forces are a good thing to have, but rampant chaos like in the 1920s where everybody just lets the market do as it pleases and eventually become it's own undoing, that not good either.

That's not how it happened. Criminal enterprise and Capitalist Markets are not the same thing. One is against the law and morally questionable, one is just people freely buying and selling things.

What we call Capitalism is not what capitalism started as. Like Communism and communism, or Socialism and socialism.

I see a Boston Tea Party comming

run Chairman Obama

"Growing numbers of economists support federal takeovers of failing banks. Why do economists hate capitalism?"

Capitalism? what is this "Capitalism" you speak of? I am not familiar with it as an actually existing entity.

tartie_pants: The thing that drives me bananas is this, the US ALREADY nationalizes banks on a regular basis. The difference being they are smaller banks, but the policy of nationalizing, stabilizing and reprivitizing banks is a policy that this government has supported through many administrations. Not to mention that we also direct the IMF to do this in countries with banking issues. The hesitancy to do this in this situation is not based on facts its based on illogical talking head fear of the socialism boogie man. It is ridiculous and it is costing our nation dearly. Yes I am looking at you Glen.

It's based on the fear of US government assuming what could be a debt of 56 trillion dollars which in turn would cause the T-market to collapse which would in turn make us all into gay motorbikers wearing mo-hawks and football pads.

The level of oh-shiat that is happening in our farked up banking system is crazy. Contrary to popular belief it was not due to de-regulation, it was due to corruption and piss poor regulation designed to make politicians and their rich banker friends and families more rich than their Ivy League asses already were without fear because the prols are going to be the ones sweating and bleeding to pick up their tab.

I'm too lazy to do more than scan the article, but I can't help but feel expert economists, who are experts on our crumbling system, have much more to lose than us commoners if failed banks are left to fail.

Because Capitalism hates America.

Because they own a lot of bank stocks?

MyRandomName: tartie_pants: The thing that drives me bananas is this, the US ALREADY nationalizes banks on a regular basis. The difference being they are smaller banks, but the policy of nationalizing, stabilizing and reprivitizing banks is a policy that this government has supported through many administrations. Not to mention that we also direct the IMF to do this in countries with banking issues. The hesitancy to do this in this situation is not based on facts its based on illogical talking head fear of the socialism boogie man. It is ridiculous and it is costing our nation dearly. Yes I am looking at you Glen.

Umm... aside from USAA, which banks are already nationalized?

any bank in which the FDIC has to step in is nationalized. would you like a list of every bank that has failed since the inception of the FDIC?

I posted this in another thread. Maybe it would be interesting here.

depmode98:

2) Capitalism is great in theory, but not so much in reality.

??? And you see capitalism.... where???

Can you name one single area of American life that is in not regulated in some way by the State?

If you are defining capitalism the way I think you are, by what we currently have as an economic system, then what you are really referring to is the original pre-Nazi Italian-European definition of Fascism.

Blaming Capitalism for our current economic situation is like blaming Buddhism for the actions of a follower of Anton LeVey's Church of Satan.

Skleenar: I posted this in another thread. Maybe it would be interesting here.

The doom and gloomers will freak out due to the over correction that is comong on your graph. They will think it proves you wrong. But when the Dow comes back up from 200 and settles in at 10,000 again in 2021, I will be on your side to defend your rightous graph.

/Funny isn't how much fuss is made over 30 companies?

bookman: depmode98:

2) Capitalism is great in theory, but not so much in reality.

??? And you see capitalism.... where???

Can you name one single area of American life that is in not regulated in some way by the State?

If you are defining capitalism the way I think you are, by what we currently have as an economic system, then what you are really referring to is the original pre-Nazi Italian-European definition of Fascism.

Blaming Capitalism for our current economic situation is like blaming Buddhism for the actions of a follower of Anton LeVey's Church of Satan.

THIS

1. Take over banks.

2. Split all assets into two parts: inelastically supplied, naturally-occurring assets like land; and assets that are elastically supplied and created, such as products of labor and capital, including buildings and other improvements to land.

3. Retain title of the "land" portion, and rent to those currently using these assets at fair market rates. Renegotiate the remaining assets at the current interest rate.

/why yes, this is a roundabout method of moving to land value taxation. It's also a way of getting actual value for the money taxpayers are spending to bail out banks, and for preventing housing bubbles in the future.

worlds tallest midget: The system only works if failing has consequences. Let the banks that farked-up fail. If they cannot fail, the shenanigans will grow exponentially. The dems love shenanigans and money, making the bank bail-outs are the ultimate scenario for the power hungry weasels.

Exactly! If the government only let people pay for their mistakes, they might be more careful about not farking up in the future. If they bail everybody out, nobody will learn anything and we will be back in the same place in a few decades time.

t3knomanser: Capitalism is an antique economic philosophy built around the production of goods- something that Americans haven't done in years. Socialism, with its built in mechanisms for causing privation and starvation, at least is able to operate in a reality where no one in the economy actually does anything.

That is absolute bullshiat!

Only recently the US was producing a third of world gross domestic product, with one about one 20th of its population.

The problem is the government and the fed manipulated the economy so that Americans were consuming 1/2 of the world's GDP.

I don't care if it's socialism, or capitalism, or what. Just get the damn things working again so everyone will stop freaking out and spend money again and start hiring and all.

Because at this point a decision needs to be made, so everyone can start planning. Can't have a plan with this many unknowns except "hold on to every dime and hunker down", and that doesn't do much to get the economy rolling again.

Pure socialism - bad
Pure capitalism - bad

A balanced mix of the two - good.

Contents of a Space Wasp's stomach: The doom and gloomers will freak out due to the over correction that is comong on your graph. They will think it proves you wrong. But when the Dow comes back up from 200 and settles in at 10,000 again in 2021, I will be on your side to defend your rightous graph.

I don't really know what I can be proven 'wrong' about--I'm not trying to prove anyting. This just seems to be an interesting way to view the Dow's performance over the last quarter century or so.

However, one of the things the "doom and gloomers" have in their quiver is that we are currently seeing a collapse of the banking system which is a market force that is not like anything that was experienced before in the time frame shown in the graph.

I don't see how Obama can avoid nationalizing Citi at the very least.

It worked out for IndyMac. What's the big deal, biatch?

Skleenar: I posted this in another thread. Maybe it would be interesting here.

I've seen a couple of different interpretations of that graph. One is that we've actually been in a bear market for years and that the most recent boom was just an illusion caused by overvalued securities that aren't based on anything meaningful. Now we've corrected back to close to what the value of these stocks actually SHOULD be.

heinekenftw: Pure socialism - bad
Pure capitalism - bad

A balanced mix of the two - good.

Wrong! Socialism is always bad. It's never worked, never will.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

'Scientists' like controlled conditions to observe and experiment in. Markets are like studying global warming during a tornado: too much violent weather to even see the 'climate'.

Just came here to point out that I have been predicting this for months. See my previous posts.