On Thursday, January 28, 2021 at 9:59:00 AM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 1/28/2021 8:26 AM, John Kuthe wrote:
> > https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/28/b...ck-market.html
> >
> > Everyone is after quick bucks! ;-)
> >
> > John Kuthe, RN, BSN...
> >
> Yep, some people will make tons of money, others will lose a bunch.

And a bunch of little folks who could only afford to risk a few hundred or a thousand
could double or quintuple their money in a couple of weeks. My son is in for a grand,
and he's hoping to sell for 5-6K. That's a lot better than the ~20-80% profits he makes
on his land business deals.

The short sellers are getting bailed out, and are not being pitied by folks on the Right
or the Left, and the sentiments of most reasonable center-Left and center-Right folks
tend to support the right of the little guys to get into the game for what they can get
out of it. This is a correction in the way that Capitalism is being practiced. What
amuses me is that the libertarian folks seem to relish the chaos, and want to see
less regulation, and the "reasonable center-Left and center-Right folks," while they
might see this as *what's good for the goose*, will likely be more supportive of more
safeguards.

IMO, the big mistake after the Great Recession was the way that Wall Street was
forgiven by the leadership of both Parties, and allowed to continue their risky
behaviors. In Iceland, the crooks were treated like crooks. The way to stabilize the
finance industry is clear, and that's through the tax code, treating capital gains on
equities held for only a short time in the same way as income earned for actual
work (wages/salaries). A tiny % surtax on trades would also make sense, as would
a significant increase in the cap on income subject to Social Security contributions.

It's not a choice between stagnant socialism and predatory capitalism. It's about
reasonable balance, reasonable equity, and maintaning both physical infrastructure
and the fulfilment of entitlements. They're called entitlements for a reason.
Financial promises are financial promises, whether they are from the government, or
a private entity.

We should have a social safety net, *and* robust profit incentives. The two are not
mutually exclusive. Ideological extremism is dangerous, and I contend that it is
likely to get a foothold only when there is discontent over economic inequity, which
breeds nutty populism.

--Bryan