3 ms·

>Regulations lead to lobbying. And lobbying leads to corruption. Capitalism is a prerequisite for lobbying. Regulations are not. >For instance the financial c

>Regulations lead to lobbying. And lobbying leads to corruption. Capitalism is a prerequisite for lobbying. Regulations are not. >For instance the financial crisis. One big reason for this was regulations forcing banks to make awful loans in Bush’s “ownership economy”. This is bank propaganda. It's been debunked countless times: https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/05/06/the-lie-that-wont-die-poor-borrowers-caused-the-financial-crisis/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/05/06/the-lie-... >This led to a situation where free market products (mortgage backed securities and derivatives) were corrupted with so many bad loans. The bad loans were made by people who knew exactly what they were doing. It was a form of control fraud (sometimes called "bankruptcy for profit").

mikem170 7y ago
>Capitalism is a prerequisite for lobbying. Regulations are not. I strongly disagree, or am missing your point. Is not the purpose of lobbying to get favorable treatment from those in power? What does capitalism have to do with it? Or do you mean specifically registered corporate lobbyists in Washington DC? The U.S. government sits on top of one third of the world's GDP, the largest military by far, dominating all corners of the globe, etc. Of course this attracts every type of corrupting influence possible. hardly nobody bothers lobbying the Somali government, right? I wonder how do you protect the system from so many selfish interests...
g2ah5z 7y ago
> Capitalism is a prerequisite for lobbying. Regulations are not. In order for lobbying to be effective, there must be a large and powerful government which can be lobbied to. The reason the farm lobby spends millions of dollars is because they get billions in subsidies in return. It would be more accurate to say that big government is a prerequisite for lobby, since a small government that merely enforces property rights wouldn't be worth lobbying to. > This is bank propaganda. It's been debunked countless times It's an empirical fact that Fannie and Freddie, which are government sponsored entities that buy the largest share of mortgages, lowered their standards significantly leading up to the crash in order to make artificially cheap loans more accessible to people who would otherwise be considered too risky to lend to. > The bad loans were made by people who knew exactly what they were doing. Lenders originated subprime loans because the government guaranteed to buy them via Fannie and Freddie. If Fannie and Freddie hadn't existed, these bad loans would have never been made in the first place.

mikem170 7y ago

>Capitalism is a prerequisite for lobbying. Regulations are not. I strongly disagree, or am missing your point. Is not the purpose of lobbying to get favorable treatment from those in power? What does capitalism have to do with it? Or do you mean specifically registered corporate lobbyists in Washington DC? The U.S. government sits on top of one third of the world's GDP, the largest military by far, dominating all corners of the globe, etc. Of course this attracts every type of corrupting influence possible. hardly nobody bothers lobbying the Somali government, right? I wonder how do you protect the system from so many selfish interests...

g2ah5z 7y ago

> Capitalism is a prerequisite for lobbying. Regulations are not. In order for lobbying to be effective, there must be a large and powerful government which can be lobbied to. The reason the farm lobby spends millions of dollars is because they get billions in subsidies in return. It would be more accurate to say that big government is a prerequisite for lobby, since a small government that merely enforces property rights wouldn't be worth lobbying to. > This is bank propaganda. It's been debunked countless times It's an empirical fact that Fannie and Freddie, which are government sponsored entities that buy the largest share of mortgages, lowered their standards significantly leading up to the crash in order to make artificially cheap loans more accessible to people who would otherwise be considered too risky to lend to. > The bad loans were made by people who knew exactly what they were doing. Lenders originated subprime loans because the government guaranteed to buy them via Fannie and Freddie. If Fannie and Freddie hadn't existed, these bad loans would have never been made in the first place.