Have you read [The Monster] by [[Michael W. Hudson]]? What did you think?
ConversazioniProgressive & Liberal!
Iscriviti a LibraryThing per pubblicare un messaggio.
Questa conversazione è attualmente segnalata come "addormentata"—l'ultimo messaggio è più vecchio di 90 giorni. Puoi rianimarla postando una risposta.
1Just1MoreBook
The Monster How a Gang of Predatory Lenders and Wall Street Bankers Fleeced America - And Spawned a Global Crisis. I'm 3/4 through the book and totally enjoying it. How could I be living in "The O.C." and not know this was going on?
2eromsted
The Monster: How a Gangof Predatory Lenders and Wall Street Bankers Fleeced America - And Spawned a Global Crisis. by Michael W. Hudson
Haven't read the book. Just getting you a working touchstone. When the main title is so common it can work better to include all or part of the subtitle in the brackets.
Haven't read the book. Just getting you a working touchstone. When the main title is so common it can work better to include all or part of the subtitle in the brackets.
3JNagarya
#1 --
That is the nature of "Libertarianism" in action. Non-"Libertarians" recognize it for what it is: lawless sociopathology. By contrast, it was John Adams' view that the fundamental problem was greed -- in the language of the day "jealousy" -- and that it was an ineradicable element of human nature.
And as it is the nature of greed to devour everything, and in the end devour itself, and not in the nature of greed to regulate itself, he devised a system -- checks and balances -- in which "jealousies" were parsed into three separate branches, the idea that each "jealousy" would be held in check -- contained, controlled, regulated -- by the other two.
So beware those whose constant rant is against "over"-regulation and for "deregulation" in favor of the so-called "free market". Realize it or not, they are urging the fiction that freedom and law are opposed.
As for the myth of "free market": the market is always regulated -- whether by gov't for the benefit of all, or by the minority private corporate sector for the sole benefit of the minority private corporate sector. The notion that the "market" can regulate itself "if only left alone" is poppycock uttered by none other than greed, as revealed in the "Libertarian"'s "caveat emptor":
"If your wallet is stolen, it's your own damned fault for having had a wallet."
#2 --
I always prefer the full title of any book. For one, it tends to impart some sense of the topic of the book, And sometimes that can be the only way to find additional information about the book, and perhaps even to track down a copy.
It also "feels" right, and respectful of the author's efforts.
That is the nature of "Libertarianism" in action. Non-"Libertarians" recognize it for what it is: lawless sociopathology. By contrast, it was John Adams' view that the fundamental problem was greed -- in the language of the day "jealousy" -- and that it was an ineradicable element of human nature.
And as it is the nature of greed to devour everything, and in the end devour itself, and not in the nature of greed to regulate itself, he devised a system -- checks and balances -- in which "jealousies" were parsed into three separate branches, the idea that each "jealousy" would be held in check -- contained, controlled, regulated -- by the other two.
So beware those whose constant rant is against "over"-regulation and for "deregulation" in favor of the so-called "free market". Realize it or not, they are urging the fiction that freedom and law are opposed.
As for the myth of "free market": the market is always regulated -- whether by gov't for the benefit of all, or by the minority private corporate sector for the sole benefit of the minority private corporate sector. The notion that the "market" can regulate itself "if only left alone" is poppycock uttered by none other than greed, as revealed in the "Libertarian"'s "caveat emptor":
"If your wallet is stolen, it's your own damned fault for having had a wallet."
#2 --
I always prefer the full title of any book. For one, it tends to impart some sense of the topic of the book, And sometimes that can be the only way to find additional information about the book, and perhaps even to track down a copy.
It also "feels" right, and respectful of the author's efforts.
4Just1MoreBook
Questo messaggio è stato cancellato dall'autore.
Iscriviti per commentare
