"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
news
"charlesb" wrote:

OH, I see! - You're talking about the government
being intelligent enough to keep it's hands off of the
economy so that it can mature and grow! I couldn't
agree with you more. - And you have history on
your side, in this arguement. Every recorded instance
of governmental meddling with the parameters of the
economy has resulted in fiasco, a net loss. (snip)


I'm arguing for a change in the ways things are done now, Charles. Not
for
more of the same garbage. If you're truly that dissatisfied, you should
want
some form of change. Instead, you seem to arguing to keep the existing
status quo.

Amazing that you can interpret all that from my post, which I had thought to
be fairly straightforward and easy to understand.

Let's try again: The kind of economic manipulation that you are advocating
has been tried many, many times, with consistently poor results. It is not
"new" and further manipulations of this kind would not be a "change", as it
has been tried extensively already. - Again; With consistently poor results.

A good "change" would be to adopt a more intelligent attitude about the
market and resist the "Pollyanna" temptation to attempt to legislate
prosperity.

Of course it could be that you will read this and conclude that I must mean
that parrots are smarter than doves, so they would be the best thing to use
for a messenger service... After your left-field response to my first post,
I would not be at all surprised.

This may point out where some of our economic woes may originate.... Are all
people who advocate manipulation of the economy by well-meaning fools
functionally illiterate? Perhaps that is what keeps them from learning the
simple lessons of history, tempting them to advocate old, bad ideas that are
conspicuous for thier repeated failure?

Charles Brabham, N5PVL