Comments on: Greenspan Abandons Free Market http://lolfed.com/2009/10/15/greenspan-abandons-free-market/ Financial Humor, Political Jokes and LOLCats Tue, 15 May 2012 19:52:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Andyhttp://lolfed.com/2009/10/15/greenspan-abandons-free-market/#comment-4183 Andy Sat, 17 Oct 2009 07:41:26 +0000 http://lolfed.com/?p=4972#comment-4183 I think the problem that Mr. Greenspan is identifying is that our polity lacks the will power to let things fail when they should fail. So in order to track a free market result as closely as is reasonably practicable in our foreseeable long-term circumstances, we should never let a company get so much big that it can hold such a big political bludgeon over our heads. I think the problem that Mr. Greenspan is identifying is that our polity lacks the will power to let things fail when they should fail. So in order to track a free market result as closely as is reasonably practicable in our foreseeable long-term circumstances, we should never let a company get so much big that it can hold such a big political bludgeon over our heads.

]]> By: Jasonhttp://lolfed.com/2009/10/15/greenspan-abandons-free-market/#comment-4180 Jason Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:15:48 +0000 http://lolfed.com/?p=4972#comment-4180 The free market approach would have a company grow as much as it's able and, in the event that it becomes to large to remain cohesive, also allow it to fail without intervention. That's the "free" part. What you're talking about is the opposite of a free market, even though it would achieve the same end result as free markets are supposed to. I'm not saying he's incorrect, this is just the last thing I would have expected to hear him say, given his track record. Next thing you know he'll be calling for the repeal of the Riegle-Neal Act. The free market approach would have a company grow as much as it’s able and, in the event that it becomes to large to remain cohesive, also allow it to fail without intervention. That’s the “free” part.

What you’re talking about is the opposite of a free market, even though it would achieve the same end result as free markets are supposed to. I’m not saying he’s incorrect, this is just the last thing I would have expected to hear him say, given his track record.

Next thing you know he’ll be calling for the repeal of the Riegle-Neal Act.

]]> By: willhttp://lolfed.com/2009/10/15/greenspan-abandons-free-market/#comment-4179 will Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:25:40 +0000 http://lolfed.com/?p=4972#comment-4179 How is breaking up over-large companies not a free market approach? If we had lots of small banks they might *gasp* actually compete for our business. How is breaking up over-large companies not a free market approach? If we had lots of small banks they might *gasp* actually compete for our business.

]]> By: bbhttp://lolfed.com/2009/10/15/greenspan-abandons-free-market/#comment-4178 bb Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:02:11 +0000 http://lolfed.com/?p=4972#comment-4178 none of the banks is too big to fail. the problem is that each one holds the others by the balls with hands (aka interconnected). you hit one of them, it clenches the genitals of 2 others who on their turn clench 2 more and so on, you get the picture. small and less interconnected banks (means broken by line of business) means less balls pain. the old man is right about that, though he never had balls. none of the banks is too big to fail. the problem is that each one holds the others by the balls with hands (aka interconnected). you hit one of them, it clenches the genitals of 2 others who on their turn clench 2 more and so on, you get the picture. small and less interconnected banks (means broken by line of business) means less balls pain. the old man is right about that, though he never had balls.

]]>