Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> George > wrote:
>
>
>> 47% of those who voted didn't vote for Obama. Clearly you expressed
>> something completely different. I think the intense polarization that
>> drives this is driven by the fat cats who own the politicians playing
>> with us.
>>
>> A good current example is we are told it is a good thing that the "blue
>> team" controls Congress because they are very smart and work for the
>> "common man". Yet they voted to pull currently around a trillion dollars
>> out of our pockets to throw it on the front steps of the useless
>> financial industry which are nothing but a bunch of greedy parasitical
>> thieves who have inserted themselves into every aspect of life.
>
> So, let's agree that throwing a trillion dollars of good money after bad
> is a very painful experience. So, would the "red" team have done this?
> Or would they have made it two trillion? Just speculation. And who is
> responsible for the mess anyway? Some folks think that the "red" team
> gutting the Federal regulations might have been a big factor. Was the
> "blue" team blameless? Of course not. Enough of them voted for these
> laws that they passed. The big one was signed by Bill Clinton, as
> President. Everybody, both red and blue, though that deregulation and
> the free market were good things.
>


Tell me more about this "free market" concept you mentioned in your last
sentence. From where I sit it appears we have a Capitalist profit and
Socialist loss system. If there were actually a "free market" the
companies that were poorly managed or that imploded because of greed
would simply disappear or their assets purchased by a stronger
organization wouldn't they?