The banking failures, crimes, and deceptions have nothing whatsoever to do with government spending. Your model of cause and effect is seriously subjective, Maddus.
If the government gives off a signal that it's OK to live on debt and that it's OK as long as someone else pays (we've seen that on numerous occasions in our history) people will follow that example.
How can you prohibit somebody else, luxuries you permit yourself. It's the same with children. If you put your knife in your mouth, odds are your toddlers will pick up on that habit, regardless of the rules.
So you think deviant bankers and traders were only willing to steal if there was a victim compensation plan guarantee (aka bailout)?
No, I think they will steal nonetheless. But, I think they will steal a whole lot less if they feel the consequence. And I do not mean a fine of $300 billion, I mean out of a job in the streets bankruptcy. And currently, we do not make them feel pain, so they will continue.
The addiction to an always growing economy
It has it's ups and downs, but the overall trend is up. To prevent the downs by bailouts, only creates a bigger down and a smaller up.I don't think going for growth is a bad thing.
But that's not the worst part - the worst part is that the investment capital itself is being siphoned of real value and replaced with garbage derivatives. It is this garbage hidden on bank ledgers that has the economy stalled -- banks do not trust each other to trade like they did in the recent past.
Oh I agree,..
But I don't agree with your pick of the prime suspect.
@cbae: Where does it say in a democracy that it is based on four year terms?
Imagine a system in which EVERYBODY would copy from each other.
They already do, that's why we have this court cases. Only difference is, is that you can build on each other's ideas, instead of constantly reinventing the wheel.
No company would be able to differentiate its products from another's.
Yes they would, they do it now, despite copying from each other. You can differentiate with price, added value, etc. etc.
Instead of competing on features, quality, or price, companies would be competing solely on marketing.
No, they can compete on whichever facet they want.