Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is one of those rare times that I agree politics should be avoided on HN. This comment is simplistic and seemingly driven by emotion. There's no development to any of the points. You lay them out as a given without any support.

And people are upvoting you.




Could you explain yourself a little better?

The parent comment was overly broad and emotional, sure, but the markets in this case were clearly defined by some kind of political mechanism. Blaming it on the politicians doesn't seem all that outrageous at all to me (as long as we don't start calling out specific parties and politicians, which would then obviously degenerate quickly into asshattery)

Just wondering. I agree it was simplistic and emotional, but I must have missed the baiting or other part that made it bad for HN. (Also, in all fairness, this entire article and comment thread is nothing more than an emotional internet lynch mob, out with their pitchforks and torches, ready to start the inquisitions and begin burning the witches, so compared to the article, the comment seemed rather tame and your response oddly incongruent)


At the time it was the only comment that was strictly political.

One sentence of support on each point to give people something to drop in Google would be enough to take it from "emotional drivel" to "bad idea, but not entirely useless."


Thanks.

I know as soon as I looked at the title, I groaned as I clicked the link to the comments. Sometimes you just know how these things are going to go.


> our politicians are underwriting irresponsible risk taking

The government is underwriting risk by bailing out various institutions (Fannie, Freddie, Citi, AIG, ...).

> why they believe bubbles are the only way to prosperity

This is over the top by saying that they believe that bubble blowing is the only way to prosperity.

Bubble blowing is part of the agenda. The artificially low interest rates set by the Federal Reserve is one example of bubble blowing.

> why they simply cannot stop spending money we don't have

Politicians from the two major parties talk about the need for spending reductions, but it does not look like they will make a significant dent in the problem.


A great many people are enthralled with Keynesianism, feel its government's job to create jobs regardless of other consequences, and have put forth policies designed to re-inflate bubbles, such as in housing and autos. And got them passed.

Not to mention the low rates, which will be as successful as they have been in Japan.

Yes, that may be changing and no, they don't call them bubbles, but that is what they are.

And I too will hold my breath to see if they can actually rein in spending. I hope they can. Shopping for a country with a future is a task I'd like to avoid.


See, this is good. Research leads are handy.

I knew what the OP was talking about, but imagine if I didn't. I wouldn't have any context for the points.

Have a karma cookie.


Upvoted. For those who want more explanation of how bubbles work, see this: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/12/why-wall... Atlantic article, which should be required reading for anyone who pontificates on the issue.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: