1)To restrain successful people so you (& your ilk) can pretend to compete. 2)To distribute the goodies taken from those who have earned it and give to those who have not (especially if they have the right skin color). 3) If you stub your toe on a chair , loudly denounce it as a "racist" maybe even a "redneck". I think that about covers it.
National Defense Enforce Trade Contracts (between nations) Play referee for disputes on matters regarding internal legality (Ie, New Jersey sues New York because of claims on the Hudson River, etc). Oversight on the financial industry.
I agree with all of these things. This common sense, these things allow stability, and stability is good for business. Surely you are not one of those that believes that the financial industry does not need better watch dogs, after they nearly put us in the tank, do you?
How could I think that it does not need better watchdogs when I just got done saying the government should be responsible for that aspect? The SEC, CFTC, FINRA, etc..especially the Fed. ALL of them are at BEST, impotent and ignorant. At worst, they are complicit in the crimes. Not one agency works. Not one.
They are in on the take. Why, the SEC had set up camp INSIDE Lehman on it's final days, if I recall correctly.
Can you expand on your question? Why bother having the agencies at all? Why bother having regulations? Is that what you're asking?
No argument here. If you support this notion, why are you not pissed off at Obama for not doing what he said? Didn't he run on a campaign in 2008 that was going to stop this criminal activity?
Yes he did, and he had no idea what he was talking about. Candidate Obama had no idea of the info, nor the obligations he would have as President Obama. He did not close Gitmo for the same reason. And lastly, because the real owners of this country did not want him to stop that criminal activity. What we need as a President is a single man with no kids. Otherwise, he will do as he is told, point blank period.