About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 5:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I thought that it was nicely done.  Nice of them to notice and say something, you know.  Even as an objectivist myself, I find it pretty easy to ignore the Ayn Rand Institute, so I am happy that they got exposure.  There are in America today several millions who understand economics well enough to know that government intervention always brings us to where we are today.  Many of them live in and around St. Louis, and so they had an opportunity to be amused or outraged depending on their subjective evaluations.  Either way, economics tells us that the experience was worth more to them than the price of the newspaper.


Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 8:27amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I was going to post a comment on the article but the registration and formalities were too cumbersome. I was going to submit a letter that I have written to my local newspaper:

It is evident that the capitalism bashers on these pages don't have any idea as to what laissez-faire capitalism actually is. It means, "hands-off government involvement in the economy." It means competing alternative currencies, no Federal Reserve Board, no social engineering, no bail outs. Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac were created in the late '60s for the express purpose of providing mortgages to low income people whom the greedy, bottom line capitalists recognized as poor risks. It was social engineering in full flower. This legacy is with us yet and has percolated up through all the administrations since then, saddling us with the crisis that is now upon us. The smartest socialist bureaucrats on the planet couldn't see this coming but it was irrevocably cast by the do-gooders who thought they should intervene, motivated by the lofty premise that more home ownership stabilizes families and is good for the economy. That sentiment may be valid but look what that government intervention has wrought. Capitalism has all the mechanisms within itself to identify such needs and satisfy them.
 
Sam


Post 2

Sunday, December 28, 2008 - 7:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Nicely, said, Paul!  One footnote, if you don't mind.  You said (rightly): "Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac were created in the late '60s for the express purpose of providing mortgages to low income people whom the greedy, bottom line capitalists recognized as poor risks."
 
Actually, all manner of capitalists are willing to compete for the opportunity to take on even poor risks.  

       

As Peter Bernstein points out often in Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk, even a poor risk is a calculable risk.  The problem with socialism is that it denies the reality of arithmetic.  They want  2 + 2 = 5, so that the 1 missing does not need to be worried about.

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 12/28, 7:03am)


Post 3

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 1:33pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
You'll be happy to learn: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2M4NGJhZGNhN2Y0MGNhM2RmYzc1ZWNmMDQ3YTc5ODM=

Post 4

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 1:46pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
actually, suspect there will be bloggers attending these meetings, who will make comments on them as they text to the pc... so in that respect, no, not missed...

Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.