<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: National Liberal Radio Perfectly Summarized</title>
	<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335</link>
	<description>make it happen</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: boose</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18917</link>
		<author>boose</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18917</guid>
		<description>oh, I was talking about union members, but them too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh, I was talking about union members, but them too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18885</link>
		<author>Michael</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18885</guid>
		<description>Why should Union officials take a pay cut when they can get the American tax payer to cover the difference?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why should Union officials take a pay cut when they can get the American tax payer to cover the difference?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boose</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18847</link>
		<author>Boose</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 04:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18847</guid>
		<description>Ug.  Just to step in here, I'd like to remind everyone that the Unions are backed by law, and aren't really part of the free market.  Their election systems are messed up, and they hardly act in the favor of their members.  The fact that Union officials haven't said a word about taking cuts so that the business can stay afloat is absolutely astonishing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ug.  Just to step in here, I&#8217;d like to remind everyone that the Unions are backed by law, and aren&#8217;t really part of the free market.  Their election systems are messed up, and they hardly act in the favor of their members.  The fact that Union officials haven&#8217;t said a word about taking cuts so that the business can stay afloat is absolutely astonishing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18834</link>
		<author>Michael</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:25:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18834</guid>
		<description>Shareholders in these companies must take responsibility for the company they own. They elect the board of directors, the board selects the CEO.  It is not the responsibility of the government to inform companies on how to run their businesses.

Let's say I open up a small factory that makes widgets. I hire a manager and regular employees. The employees decide they won't work unless I pay them more, so they strike. My manager agrees to their demands so that the factory stays open and he can keep his job, but now my company is losing money. I try building cheaper, lower quality widgets to save money, but nobody wants to buy them, and I am still in the red. I take out loans to try to save my business, but that only delays the inevitable. On the brink of bankruptcy, I ask you, the tax payer, to give me a loan, so that my employees don't lose their jobs. It's not my fault my business is failing, my manager made the agreement, not me, so you have to help me. Then the government should make a law that holds the manager I hired accountable for his poor judgment. It is the federal government's job to take responsibility for my company, not mine.

As for securitized mortgages, brokers were able to make the initial bad loans because investors wanted to buy those loans in a securitized package. These investors thought putting their money in American home loans was a safe investment. They were wrong. So we, the American people, say it's ok, we'll take care of the mess you made of things, don't worry about it. You don't have to go broke after making bad investment decisions, because Uncle Sam is here to bail you out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shareholders in these companies must take responsibility for the company they own. They elect the board of directors, the board selects the CEO.  It is not the responsibility of the government to inform companies on how to run their businesses.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s say I open up a small factory that makes widgets. I hire a manager and regular employees. The employees decide they won&#8217;t work unless I pay them more, so they strike. My manager agrees to their demands so that the factory stays open and he can keep his job, but now my company is losing money. I try building cheaper, lower quality widgets to save money, but nobody wants to buy them, and I am still in the red. I take out loans to try to save my business, but that only delays the inevitable. On the brink of bankruptcy, I ask you, the tax payer, to give me a loan, so that my employees don&#8217;t lose their jobs. It&#8217;s not my fault my business is failing, my manager made the agreement, not me, so you have to help me. Then the government should make a law that holds the manager I hired accountable for his poor judgment. It is the federal government&#8217;s job to take responsibility for my company, not mine.</p>
<p>As for securitized mortgages, brokers were able to make the initial bad loans because investors wanted to buy those loans in a securitized package. These investors thought putting their money in American home loans was a safe investment. They were wrong. So we, the American people, say it&#8217;s ok, we&#8217;ll take care of the mess you made of things, don&#8217;t worry about it. You don&#8217;t have to go broke after making bad investment decisions, because Uncle Sam is here to bail you out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darwin</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18830</link>
		<author>Darwin</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:39:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18830</guid>
		<description>The problem with your account is that the people who are making the decisions aren't suffering the consequences- either their companies are suffering long after they've moved on to new jobs elsewhere or retired, or else they still get millions of dollars and lavish retreats and so forth while running a company into the ground.  I agree that the system would work if CEOs who made bad decisions ended up as penniless and destitute as the workers they put out of jobs, but as things work now, there's just not enough of a disincentive to ensure that the free market principles operate smoothly.  And while it may be true that the free market will still function in its current form, with giant financial and auto companies going out of business after 20-30 years of bad decisions and shuffling debt, it simply operates too slowly and with too much collateral damage.  Regulations could force the market back into a place where individuals are held responsible for their decisions, and where dangerous schemes like the high-risk mortgages that are behind so much of the current crisis would have their negative fallout happen quickly and locally, rather than allowing them to grow like a tumor throughout our economy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with your account is that the people who are making the decisions aren&#8217;t suffering the consequences- either their companies are suffering long after they&#8217;ve moved on to new jobs elsewhere or retired, or else they still get millions of dollars and lavish retreats and so forth while running a company into the ground.  I agree that the system would work if CEOs who made bad decisions ended up as penniless and destitute as the workers they put out of jobs, but as things work now, there&#8217;s just not enough of a disincentive to ensure that the free market principles operate smoothly.  And while it may be true that the free market will still function in its current form, with giant financial and auto companies going out of business after 20-30 years of bad decisions and shuffling debt, it simply operates too slowly and with too much collateral damage.  Regulations could force the market back into a place where individuals are held responsible for their decisions, and where dangerous schemes like the high-risk mortgages that are behind so much of the current crisis would have their negative fallout happen quickly and locally, rather than allowing them to grow like a tumor throughout our economy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18828</link>
		<author>Michael</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:48:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18828</guid>
		<description>Darwin, that's not a vulnerability of the free market system, it's a feature. If company boards members hire a CEO who makes poor long term decisions, then that company can and probably will fail. More regulation is completely unnecessary; the market regulates itself in this respect. If people choose to act irresponsibly then they will suffer the consequences. That is what happens in a free nation. I refuse to foot the bill when greedy auto executives made stupid agreements with equally greedy unions. Let them learn from their mistakes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Darwin, that&#8217;s not a vulnerability of the free market system, it&#8217;s a feature. If company boards members hire a CEO who makes poor long term decisions, then that company can and probably will fail. More regulation is completely unnecessary; the market regulates itself in this respect. If people choose to act irresponsibly then they will suffer the consequences. That is what happens in a free nation. I refuse to foot the bill when greedy auto executives made stupid agreements with equally greedy unions. Let them learn from their mistakes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: darwin</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18823</link>
		<author>darwin</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:43:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18823</guid>
		<description>Certainly union obligations are a big factor in why American auto companies are struggling, but let's not oversimplify- making crappy products plays a big role too. Also, let's not feel too smug portraying unions as these big thugs who muscle up to industry and start mugging their profit margins.  Companies agree to huge pensions because the CEO's can get cheap labor in the short-term, then retire with a huge bonus before the pensions crash the company.   This is exactly the same behavior we are seeing throughout the financial sector, such as in mortgages being offered to people with no hope of paying them back, and the assumed future returns on those loans being used as leverage to borrow more money.  The free market has broken down in large part because risks and costs are being pushed far enough into the future that they do not have a affect on the person making the decision, whereas that person does receive the immediate benefit.  This is a basic vulnerability of our current free market system, and one that we should be addressing through sensible regulations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Certainly union obligations are a big factor in why American auto companies are struggling, but let&#8217;s not oversimplify- making crappy products plays a big role too. Also, let&#8217;s not feel too smug portraying unions as these big thugs who muscle up to industry and start mugging their profit margins.  Companies agree to huge pensions because the CEO&#8217;s can get cheap labor in the short-term, then retire with a huge bonus before the pensions crash the company.   This is exactly the same behavior we are seeing throughout the financial sector, such as in mortgages being offered to people with no hope of paying them back, and the assumed future returns on those loans being used as leverage to borrow more money.  The free market has broken down in large part because risks and costs are being pushed far enough into the future that they do not have a affect on the person making the decision, whereas that person does receive the immediate benefit.  This is a basic vulnerability of our current free market system, and one that we should be addressing through sensible regulations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: boose</title>
		<link>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18814</link>
		<author>boose</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:32:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://enableate.com/steve/2008/1335#comment-18814</guid>
		<description>wow, I'm impressed that you listen to that station.  Props.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wow, I&#8217;m impressed that you listen to that station.  Props.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

