Olin Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Don Bodreaux wrote:
> >Your equating George W. Bush with FDR is spot-on ("Franklin
> >Delano Bush," October 20). Both presidents recklessly increased
> >government's role in the economy
By the way, I forgot to include a link to the editorial Don was responding to
above:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/20/franklin-delano-bush/
> Any institution that is that large and has that much power to
> effect the well being of so many people is no longer a "private" concern.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were heavily influenced by government's wishes,
and they did not avoid failure. Where is the evidence that the government can
fix everything?
> And when Roosevelt interceded in the economy, he did so with massive work and
> welfare programs aimed at protecting the weakest and most negatively impacted
> portions of society -- the poor.
And sent unemployment to nearly 25%. Good intentions are no substitute for good
decisions. Roosevelt's policies were disastrous for the poor.
> Perhaps its not capitalism that deserves the blame for this, but it is
> certainly
> the case that the free-market fundamentalists have had
> their chance to put their policies into practice and see the results.
Unfortunately, no, the experiment has not been performed. There is no period in
recent history where we had anything close to the lack of government
interference
that "free-market fundamentalists" advocate.
> Even Greenspan, the high priest of the free market and Laissez-faire
> policies,
No, Greenspan was a federal regulator for years. No "free-market fundamentalist"
would consider a federal regulator to be their "high priest".
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
