<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The debate between Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/</link>
	<description>A blog for people with a critically rational individualist perspective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 08:53:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Marks</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177127</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Marks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 21:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177127</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My guess is that supporting the bailout (on the advice of the &quot;great and the good&quot;) has destroyed the John McCain campaign, but the claim that he supported the wild spending of George Walker Bush over the last eight years is a lie.

Even on defence spending, John McCain attacked and attacked over the last eight years.

And, of course, both Senator Biden and Senator Obama have long claimed that President Bush has not spent enough (on everything).

Biden and Obama are two of the biggest tax-and-spend people in the Senate.

It is terrible at a time when almost 80% of the voters think government is too big, these two big government fanatics are about to be elected.

As for the neocons who are attacking the McCain campaign - these are the same neocons (Fred Barnes and so on) that advised him to accept the bailout (the real cause of McCain&#039;s problems in the polls).

It is fine for Obama to support the bailout - his campaign was not built on opposing wild government spending and politically connected special interests (quite the contrary).

But it was death for McCain to support the bailout - and it was the neocons who screamed that the sky would fall in if he did not support it.

Note to all Republicans - keep well clear of the neocons, they are poison.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My guess is that supporting the bailout (on the advice of the &#8220;great and the good&#8221;) has destroyed the John McCain campaign, but the claim that he supported the wild spending of George Walker Bush over the last eight years is a lie.</p>
<p>Even on defence spending, John McCain attacked and attacked over the last eight years.</p>
<p>And, of course, both Senator Biden and Senator Obama have long claimed that President Bush has not spent enough (on everything).</p>
<p>Biden and Obama are two of the biggest tax-and-spend people in the Senate.</p>
<p>It is terrible at a time when almost 80% of the voters think government is too big, these two big government fanatics are about to be elected.</p>
<p>As for the neocons who are attacking the McCain campaign &#8211; these are the same neocons (Fred Barnes and so on) that advised him to accept the bailout (the real cause of McCain&#8217;s problems in the polls).</p>
<p>It is fine for Obama to support the bailout &#8211; his campaign was not built on opposing wild government spending and politically connected special interests (quite the contrary).</p>
<p>But it was death for McCain to support the bailout &#8211; and it was the neocons who screamed that the sky would fall in if he did not support it.</p>
<p>Note to all Republicans &#8211; keep well clear of the neocons, they are poison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: owinok</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177126</link>
		<dc:creator>owinok</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:17:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Being ignored by the authorities and the &quot;experts&quot; is something that libertarians get used to&quot;. Graham

I agree entirely with this. What it tells me is in spite of my gripes (objective or mostly subjective) with one, the other, both candidates or Palin, one must not attribute to them the ability to decimate the US and certainly the world. After all, they do not get it. Or is there a conspiracy that I do not see? ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Being ignored by the authorities and the &#8220;experts&#8221; is something that libertarians get used to&#8221;. Graham</p>
<p>I agree entirely with this. What it tells me is in spite of my gripes (objective or mostly subjective) with one, the other, both candidates or Palin, one must not attribute to them the ability to decimate the US and certainly the world. After all, they do not get it. Or is there a conspiracy that I do not see? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Your Doctor</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177125</link>
		<dc:creator>Your Doctor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 11:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177125</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Space Nerd, I think you forgot to take your medicine again.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Space Nerd, I think you forgot to take your medicine again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sunfish</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177124</link>
		<dc:creator>Sunfish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 07:46:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Llamas, 
&lt;blockquote&gt;To paraphrase a movie version of Wyatt Earp, he&#039;s just not a deliberate man.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You&#039;re too quick to bash a man.

Seriously, though, &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://rachellucas.com/index.php/2008/10/08/sunny-performs-an-interpretative-rendering-of-the-debate/#comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Rachel Lucas had the same idea I did.&lt;/a&gt; She&#039;s brilliant, I tells ya.

John K asked, about Dear Leader,
&lt;blockquote&gt;Is he actually planning to gather power for himself though?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I wish I knew. Although I&#039;m slowly drifting around to Paul Marks&#039; idea that Obama hasn&#039;t abandoned his Marxist upbringing.

Mid,
&lt;blockquote&gt;Wow, Sunfish! You must have an incredible hang over plus some serious liver damage.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I didn&#039;t come up with the game until after the debate. But I&#039;m taping the one next week. Unfortunately, I don&#039;t have the disposable income to come up with the roughly nineteen gallons of Woodford Reserve that it would take to play.

&lt;blockquote&gt;As for health care, as a chronically uninsured, I think that in a sane world, what Barack said should totally lose him the election by a landslide.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

What was that about mandatory cancer screening? (And insert the obligatory prostate exam/IRS-BATFE jokes here)

BTW: heard on morning talk radio out of Denver: Ayres can&#039;t be that bad for Barry to associate with, because Richard M. Daley thinks he&#039;s all right. Yep, there&#039;s a real ringing endorsement.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Llamas, </p>
<blockquote><p>To paraphrase a movie version of Wyatt Earp, he&#8217;s just not a deliberate man.</p></blockquote>
<p>You&#8217;re too quick to bash a man.</p>
<p>Seriously, though, <a target="_blank" href="http://rachellucas.com/index.php/2008/10/08/sunny-performs-an-interpretative-rendering-of-the-debate/#comments" rel="nofollow">Rachel Lucas had the same idea I did.</a> She&#8217;s brilliant, I tells ya.</p>
<p>John K asked, about Dear Leader,</p>
<blockquote><p>Is he actually planning to gather power for himself though?</p></blockquote>
<p>I wish I knew. Although I&#8217;m slowly drifting around to Paul Marks&#8217; idea that Obama hasn&#8217;t abandoned his Marxist upbringing.</p>
<p>Mid,</p>
<blockquote><p>Wow, Sunfish! You must have an incredible hang over plus some serious liver damage.</p></blockquote>
<p>I didn&#8217;t come up with the game until after the debate. But I&#8217;m taping the one next week. Unfortunately, I don&#8217;t have the disposable income to come up with the roughly nineteen gallons of Woodford Reserve that it would take to play.</p>
<blockquote><p>As for health care, as a chronically uninsured, I think that in a sane world, what Barack said should totally lose him the election by a landslide.</p></blockquote>
<p>What was that about mandatory cancer screening? (And insert the obligatory prostate exam/IRS-BATFE jokes here)</p>
<p>BTW: heard on morning talk radio out of Denver: Ayres can&#8217;t be that bad for Barry to associate with, because Richard M. Daley thinks he&#8217;s all right. Yep, there&#8217;s a real ringing endorsement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Space Nerd</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177123</link>
		<dc:creator>Space Nerd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 04:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[USA UK EU ESA UN AU ASEAN AEBIOM CECED EIB EHA EHP EWEA OCP OPEC UITP

Crying over spilt subsidised corn-milk-substitutes totalling 8.73637373% of production.

Where are you all at?

]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>USA UK EU ESA UN AU ASEAN AEBIOM CECED EIB EHA EHP EWEA OCP OPEC UITP</p>
<p>Crying over spilt subsidised corn-milk-substitutes totalling 8.73637373% of production.</p>
<p>Where are you all at?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Perry de Havilland</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177122</link>
		<dc:creator>Perry de Havilland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 02:26:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;blockquote&gt;It&#039;s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it,&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Really???  All the experts?  You don&#039;t actually read much I am guessing.

&lt;blockquote&gt;Any possibility of you, like, writing a letter to the US Government or something? Seems a pity to let three hundred million people bumble along so ineffectually.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Huh?  The US government is 300 million people?  Even including the large political class with their snouts in the trough, that seems a rather large number of people &#039;bumbling along&#039;.
 
&lt;blockquote&gt;Oh wait though: freedom! markets! and just wait for the Utopia to roll in. I get it now.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

So I guess there is no crisis of regulatory statism then?  The regulated markets are just fine?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>It&#8217;s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it,</p></blockquote>
<p>Really???  All the experts?  You don&#8217;t actually read much I am guessing.</p>
<blockquote><p>Any possibility of you, like, writing a letter to the US Government or something? Seems a pity to let three hundred million people bumble along so ineffectually.</p></blockquote>
<p>Huh?  The US government is 300 million people?  Even including the large political class with their snouts in the trough, that seems a rather large number of people &#8216;bumbling along&#8217;.</p>
<blockquote><p>Oh wait though: freedom! markets! and just wait for the Utopia to roll in. I get it now.</p></blockquote>
<p>So I guess there is no crisis of regulatory statism then?  The regulated markets are just fine?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alasdair</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177121</link>
		<dc:creator>Alasdair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177121</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rex @ 06:25 PM
 
The MSM and many other keep saying that Bush and the Republicans owned White House, House, and Senate for the first 6 years ... they seem to have forgotten that the GOP didn&#039;t own the Senate during the 1st 2 years of George W&#039;s first term ...
 
And they are being *very* careful trying not to remind anyone that the Democrats have owned House and Senate since the end of January, 2007 ...

Obama last night talked repeatedly about &lt;i&gt;&quot;on the failed economic policies of the last eight years&quot;&lt;/i&gt; , &lt;i&gt;&quot;over the last eight years&quot;&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;&quot;if we reverse the policies of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place&quot;&lt;/i&gt; ...

He also said &lt;i&gt;&quot;And Senator McCain voted for four out of five of those George Bush budgets.&quot;&lt;/i&gt; - so, gentlebeings, just what happened with the other 3 Budgets during those magical 8 years ?

I&#039;m really curious to see who else, if anyone, picks up on the &quot;4 out of 5&quot; during the 8 years ...
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rex @ 06:25 PM</p>
<p>The MSM and many other keep saying that Bush and the Republicans owned White House, House, and Senate for the first 6 years &#8230; they seem to have forgotten that the GOP didn&#8217;t own the Senate during the 1st 2 years of George W&#8217;s first term &#8230;</p>
<p>And they are being *very* careful trying not to remind anyone that the Democrats have owned House and Senate since the end of January, 2007 &#8230;</p>
<p>Obama last night talked repeatedly about <i>&#8220;on the failed economic policies of the last eight years&#8221;</i> , <i>&#8220;over the last eight years&#8221;</i>, <i>&#8220;if we reverse the policies of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place&#8221;</i> &#8230;</p>
<p>He also said <i>&#8220;And Senator McCain voted for four out of five of those George Bush budgets.&#8221;</i> &#8211; so, gentlebeings, just what happened with the other 3 Budgets during those magical 8 years ?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m really curious to see who else, if anyone, picks up on the &#8220;4 out of 5&#8243; during the 8 years &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graham</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177120</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 00:15:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177120</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;It&#039;s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it, and you guys have already worked out solutions to all the problems. Not just bailout-related problems, but _all_ of them.&lt;/i&gt;

Most of the experts failed to predict the crash. Experts like Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke didn&#039;t see it coming. Watch this video for example:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=eMN5POiY0Ec&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=eMN5POiY0Ec&lt;/a&gt;

There were plenty of libertarians who understood that the global economy was on an unsustainable trend. That video shows Peter Schiff. Others include people like Jim Rogers, Ron Paul, etc. If people had listened to these guys before now, we wouldn&#039;t be in this mess. And now that they&#039;ve been proven right, they are still having zero influence on policy. Being ignored by the authorities and the &quot;experts&quot; is something that libertarians get used to.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>It&#8217;s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it, and you guys have already worked out solutions to all the problems. Not just bailout-related problems, but _all_ of them.</i></p>
<p>Most of the experts failed to predict the crash. Experts like Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke didn&#8217;t see it coming. Watch this video for example:</p>
<p><a href="http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=eMN5POiY0Ec" rel="nofollow">http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=eMN5POiY0Ec</a></p>
<p>There were plenty of libertarians who understood that the global economy was on an unsustainable trend. That video shows Peter Schiff. Others include people like Jim Rogers, Ron Paul, etc. If people had listened to these guys before now, we wouldn&#8217;t be in this mess. And now that they&#8217;ve been proven right, they are still having zero influence on policy. Being ignored by the authorities and the &#8220;experts&#8221; is something that libertarians get used to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tdh</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177119</link>
		<dc:creator>tdh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 23:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Soros wrote an amusing little book in which he introduced his broken concept &lt;i&gt;reflexivity&lt;/i&gt;, by which he meant more than that people influence the market by their expectations, practically claiming that people create their own reality (at least for a time?).  This led him to believe that the market is broken, and regulators are broken, therefore you need regulators to keep the market in check.  In closing he went out of his way to say that only a Democrat could fix things.  His arguments were rambling, and a high point occurred when he proved that he knew Hayek&#039;s name.  His son had a clue, essentially characterizing his father as using attempts at reason to justify a visceral apprehension of reality.  (This reminds me of a Ben Franklin quote on what a wonderful thing reason is.  Sorry, Ben.)

I, for one, would like to know what, um, reality it is that Obama has created.  Maybe McCain, too, yawn.

Looks like last night&#039;s format was back to that of a joint press conference, with much less interaction, let alone deep interaction, than even their first event.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Soros wrote an amusing little book in which he introduced his broken concept <i>reflexivity</i>, by which he meant more than that people influence the market by their expectations, practically claiming that people create their own reality (at least for a time?).  This led him to believe that the market is broken, and regulators are broken, therefore you need regulators to keep the market in check.  In closing he went out of his way to say that only a Democrat could fix things.  His arguments were rambling, and a high point occurred when he proved that he knew Hayek&#8217;s name.  His son had a clue, essentially characterizing his father as using attempts at reason to justify a visceral apprehension of reality.  (This reminds me of a Ben Franklin quote on what a wonderful thing reason is.  Sorry, Ben.)</p>
<p>I, for one, would like to know what, um, reality it is that Obama has created.  Maybe McCain, too, yawn.</p>
<p>Looks like last night&#8217;s format was back to that of a joint press conference, with much less interaction, let alone deep interaction, than even their first event.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177118</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:43:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177118</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;blockquote&gt;If things look bad enough for this campaign (they do) they should just turn Palin loose and follow her.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

McCain should declare he will step down after being elected president, so that Sarah Palin can replace him.
Seems at this point to be the only strategy that might produce some chance of stopping Obama.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>If things look bad enough for this campaign (they do) they should just turn Palin loose and follow her.</p></blockquote>
<p>McCain should declare he will step down after being elected president, so that Sarah Palin can replace him.<br />
Seems at this point to be the only strategy that might produce some chance of stopping Obama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Marks</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177117</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Marks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:42:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We are now told that the 300 billion Dollars to buy up mortgages will come from the 700 billion Dollars that is pledged to buy up the securities the mortgages were mutated into - oh well at least it might win a few votes.

Actually the British plan announced today is even more insane the American one - one third of the entire economy (not of the budget - of the entire economy) is being pledged to back of the banks. 

I was going to write an attempt at humour - as sadly normal with me it was going to be in &quot;poor taste&quot; and &quot;way over the top&quot;, but then I found that what I was planning to write (as insane ravings) was more moderate than what the major governments of the world had decided to do.

Shane.

If you can refute such works as de Soto&#039;s &quot;Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles&quot; please do so.

But if you can not refute such Austrian School works then please shove your establishment &quot;experts&quot; where the sun does not shine.

Leaving banking (with some relief).

On wild spending generally it is clear that it is Senator Obama who is &quot;more of the same&quot; in relation to President Bush.

It is forgotten that even ignoring defence spending, President Bush has increased government spending more than any President since Richard Price Controls Nixon (of course counting the bailout he is now worse than Nixon - but I want to forget about the banks).

And the reaction of Obama/Biden?

&quot;Not enough - more spending on health, education,........&quot; everything.

Almost a trillion Dollars of new spending.

About the same amount of debt as Senator Obama&#039;s friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed (partly at the request of such Obama groups as ACORN).

On no I have remembered the banks again.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We are now told that the 300 billion Dollars to buy up mortgages will come from the 700 billion Dollars that is pledged to buy up the securities the mortgages were mutated into &#8211; oh well at least it might win a few votes.</p>
<p>Actually the British plan announced today is even more insane the American one &#8211; one third of the entire economy (not of the budget &#8211; of the entire economy) is being pledged to back of the banks. </p>
<p>I was going to write an attempt at humour &#8211; as sadly normal with me it was going to be in &#8220;poor taste&#8221; and &#8220;way over the top&#8221;, but then I found that what I was planning to write (as insane ravings) was more moderate than what the major governments of the world had decided to do.</p>
<p>Shane.</p>
<p>If you can refute such works as de Soto&#8217;s &#8220;Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles&#8221; please do so.</p>
<p>But if you can not refute such Austrian School works then please shove your establishment &#8220;experts&#8221; where the sun does not shine.</p>
<p>Leaving banking (with some relief).</p>
<p>On wild spending generally it is clear that it is Senator Obama who is &#8220;more of the same&#8221; in relation to President Bush.</p>
<p>It is forgotten that even ignoring defence spending, President Bush has increased government spending more than any President since Richard Price Controls Nixon (of course counting the bailout he is now worse than Nixon &#8211; but I want to forget about the banks).</p>
<p>And the reaction of Obama/Biden?</p>
<p>&#8220;Not enough &#8211; more spending on health, education,&#8230;&#8230;..&#8221; everything.</p>
<p>Almost a trillion Dollars of new spending.</p>
<p>About the same amount of debt as Senator Obama&#8217;s friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed (partly at the request of such Obama groups as ACORN).</p>
<p>On no I have remembered the banks again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Marks</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2008/10/the-debate-betw/#comment-177116</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Marks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=11934#comment-177116</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We are now told that the 300 billion Dollars to buy up mortgages will come from the 700 billion Dollars that is pledged to buy up the securities the mortgages were mutated into - oh well at least it might win a few votes.

Actually the British plan announced today is even more insane the American one - one third of the entire economy (not of the budget - of the entire economy) is being pledged to back of the banks. 

I was going to write an attempt at humour - as sadly normal with me it was going to be in &quot;poor taste&quot; and &quot;way over the top&quot;, but then I found that what I was planning to write (as insane ravings) was more moderate than what the major governments of the world had decided to do.

Shane.

If you can refute such works as de Soto&#039;s &quot;Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles&quot; please do so.

But if you can not refute such Austrian School works then please shove your establishment &quot;experts&quot; where the sun does not shine.

Leaving banking (with some relief).

On wild spending generally it is clear that it is Senator Obama who is &quot;more of the same&quot; in relation to President Bush.

It is forgotten that even ignoring defence spending, President Bush has increased government spending more than any President since Richard Price Controls Nixon (of course counting the bailout he is now worse than Nixon - but I want to forget about the banks).

And the reaction of Obama/Biden?

&quot;Not enough - more spending on health, education,........&quot; everything.

Almost a trillion Dollars of new spending.

About the same amount of debt as Senator Obama&#039;s friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed (partly at the request of such Obama groups as ACORN).

On no I have remembered the banks again.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We are now told that the 300 billion Dollars to buy up mortgages will come from the 700 billion Dollars that is pledged to buy up the securities the mortgages were mutated into &#8211; oh well at least it might win a few votes.</p>
<p>Actually the British plan announced today is even more insane the American one &#8211; one third of the entire economy (not of the budget &#8211; of the entire economy) is being pledged to back of the banks. </p>
<p>I was going to write an attempt at humour &#8211; as sadly normal with me it was going to be in &#8220;poor taste&#8221; and &#8220;way over the top&#8221;, but then I found that what I was planning to write (as insane ravings) was more moderate than what the major governments of the world had decided to do.</p>
<p>Shane.</p>
<p>If you can refute such works as de Soto&#8217;s &#8220;Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles&#8221; please do so.</p>
<p>But if you can not refute such Austrian School works then please shove your establishment &#8220;experts&#8221; where the sun does not shine.</p>
<p>Leaving banking (with some relief).</p>
<p>On wild spending generally it is clear that it is Senator Obama who is &#8220;more of the same&#8221; in relation to President Bush.</p>
<p>It is forgotten that even ignoring defence spending, President Bush has increased government spending more than any President since Richard Price Controls Nixon (of course counting the bailout he is now worse than Nixon &#8211; but I want to forget about the banks).</p>
<p>And the reaction of Obama/Biden?</p>
<p>&#8220;Not enough &#8211; more spending on health, education,&#8230;&#8230;..&#8221; everything.</p>
<p>Almost a trillion Dollars of new spending.</p>
<p>About the same amount of debt as Senator Obama&#8217;s friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed (partly at the request of such Obama groups as ACORN).</p>
<p>On no I have remembered the banks again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
