Presidential Debate: Round 2

[questor]

Turtle,

Just not happy unless someone is gettin' brutalized, eh Questy? Goin' maverick on us are ya? ENOUGH!!!!

I don't make the rules, I just observe them. The same thing happens to me that happens to anyone else. How would you describe what is happening before our very eyes?

Dave, I did not say ruthlessness is needed or desired, I merely pointed out it is the nature of the market. Wouldn't you agree the market is being ruthless at the moment..wiping out years of savings and jobs?

[pgrmdave]

Efficiency demands a certain amount of ruthlessness

That's a pretty strong statement to me, and it implies that efficiency needs ruthlessness. And I would question that statement when combined with this one:

the market is being ruthless at the moment..wiping out years of savings and jobs

Are you saying that the market is being efficient right now? Is that the kind of ruthlessness you meant in your original post?

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by questor

Turtle,
I don't make the rules, I just observe them. The same thing happens to me that happens to anyone else. How would you describe what is happening before our very eyes?

Dave, I did not say ruthlessness is needed or desired, I merely pointed out it is the nature of the market. Wouldn't you agree the market is being ruthless at the moment..wiping out years of savings and jobs?

Popycock again! You relish ruthlessness and you see it in McCain and so relish him, and it takes only the thinnest reading between your lines to hear you say so. The idea of someone getting help they can't pay for sticks in your craw like a bone in a throat. We do make the rules because this is a democratic republic, and you can jolly well sit back & observe how we change them.

[Moontanman]

I can see some need for ruthlessness but not toward the people who are hurting. I think the CEOs and executives that are responsible and could have taken steps to stop this way before it got out of hand and instead through greed and just everyday not caring what happens as long as they make money. these people should not only be fired, not pass go and not collect their severance pay and golden parachutes they should pay billions in fines and do some real jail time. a couple years in maximum security should give them a pause to consider what sorry excuses for human beings they are. Both candidates seem to moving toward helping the economy but i want to see not only the people who lost their houses get help i want to see the people responsible suffer. I have no problem with someone getting rich, hell given the opportunity i would like to get rich but one thing i have never done is screw over someone to allow me to make money. I was told once that i would never be rich because i cared too much for the people I would have to screw to make money. one thing i do know is flim flam men or con artists when i see one and these people are just that, nothing more, common thieves and they should be treated as such. If me or you took money from people via lies and misdirection we would go to jail why not them?

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

I can see some need for ruthlessness ...
one thing i do know is flim flam men or con artists when i see one and these people are just that, nothing more, common thieves and they should be treated as such. If me or you took money from people via lies and misdirection we would go to jail why not them?

This is still old school revenge.

Originally Posted by Dictionary

1. feeling or showing no mercy
2. thorough and forceful, regardless of effect

ruthless - definition of ruthless by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

It is the 'regardless of effect' conotation that troubles me. Moreover, this ruthlessness does not allow any out for an individual to reform (which of course is flip-flopping, but that's another reprehensible kettle of rotten fish , eh? ). Mind you I do agree that any warranted prosecutions ought accompany the repairs, but none of a quality that does not consider the effects. Justice is blind, or so I have heard.

[questor]

Turtle, I sense anger in your reply. Do you think I want the market to fail?
Do you think I want to see people (including me) lose their savings? What makes you think I am masochistic enough to enjoy what is happening? You are correct if you assume I think people should try to pay their own way. I think that is the best way to have a healthy society. I have never said the least fortunate should not be helped, I have said people who refuse to work should be responsible for themselves. Am I living in a different world where there are millions of people starving? As far as I can determine,there are philanthropies, churches, homeless shelters and government programs to help the needy. Where is all this starvation taking place? The market now is trying to return to true value after several years of skyrocketing housing prices and manipulation of debt paper, people are going to be hurt just as they were in 1929 and 2000. This is what happens when excesses and fraud occurs. I agree the perpetrators should be punished severely.

You said:

We do make the rules because this is a democratic republic, and you can jolly well sit back & observe how we change them.

. What does this mean? Who is ''we''? and what helpful changes will be made?

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Turtle

This is still old school revenge. ruthless - definition of ruthless by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

It is the 'regardless of effect' conotation that troubles me. Moreover, this ruthlessness does not allow any out for an individual to reform (which of course is flip-flopping, but that's another reprehensible kettle of rotten fish , eh? ). Mind you I do agree that any warranted prosecutions ought accompany the repairs, but none of a quality that does not consider the effects. Justice is blind, or so I have heard.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be saying that if an individual is important he can do anything and not be punished? If a person important to our country was to murder someone in cold blood then he should not be punished to the full extent of the law because he's important? Eeww it feels icky to be almost in agreement with Questor

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

Correct me if I'm wrong.

You are wrong in your twisting of my words. My contention is simply that 'ruthlessness' is no advantageous tactic in regard to efficiency or otherwise.

Originally Posted by Questinator

Turtle, I sense anger in your reply.

Now you have read in nothing that I wrote.

Back on the topic of the debate, the concensus is that Obama did better by remaining calm while McCain flailed & railed, and Barack is making headway on securing the necessary electoral votes.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Turtle

You are wrong in your twisting of my words. My contention is simply that 'ruthlessness' is no advantageous tactic in regard to efficiency or otherwise.



Now you have read in nothing that I wrote.

Back on the topic of the debate, the concensus is that Obama did better by remaining calm while McCain flailed & railed, and Barack is making headway on securing the necessary electoral votes.

Only trying to understand, possibly we are not talking about the same thing.

[questor]

For those who have misconstrued..
The ruthlessness of which I speak is a feature of the market, not of individuals. The market has no feelings, no morals, no pity, it just tries to restore its own homeostasis and efficiency. It does not know it is ruthless.

For proof of this look in todays paper, the rich, the poor, the healthy, the sick, the black, the white, are all getting the same beating.