Re: Economist nonsense Soc.Sec. and houses

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:15:51 -0800, Peter Franks wrote:

> Can credit be legislated away?  Should it be legislated away?

First the question: Can or should it be legislated into existence?
If it can then the opposite can follow. 

In the issue of the various 'debit instruments', a government who issues 
money or cash, must have a legal position if, at the end of the day, the 
instruments claim a demand on cash.

A prudent lifestyle is certainly a virtue however central in today's  
situation is that the entire economic structure has become 'prudent' 
unfriendly if not impossible, in a none relative sense. Absolute prudence 
being "you do not buy anything you do not have the money for". I am sure 
you remember the days when one 'saved up' for things.

Also you may remember when banks where church like with their heavy air 
of order and very serious and proper actions. All of them making great 
displays of stability and trust both to their depositors and borrowers 
(not 'consumers' and not 'customers').

A base cultural ****ft has taken place away from these two things. I see 
the ****ft as being government sanctioned in the form of lax regulation or 
deregulation on the behest of private banking interests, the Federal 
Reserve having a foot in both.

Thrift is good and Government can not legislate it per se. However it 
does have, or has taken, a legal responsibility for keeping the nation's 
currency in order. It seems self-evident by now that the trading 
practices that have come to light only recently undermine if not destroy 
this order so government has a valid legal responsibility to deal with it.

One way NOT to instill confidence in dealing with it is hiring people 
from the private sector who were partly responsible for the whole thing 
to begin with.