Dodd-Frank Kills the Congo [ed.: Application of Law of Unintended Consequences]

Why would you be surprised by that? When a 100 person Senate puts together a complex piece of legislation thousands of pages long, regulating industries they’ve never worked in, how do you think they go about doing that? Do you thnk they’re all brilliant sages who know everything and just figure out what’s best on their own and write it up?

In actuality, these people have huge staffs. Those staffs themselves are not experts in the fields they are trying to regulate. So who do they listen to? Lobbyists. They bring in experts from the industries they will be regulating. They listen to special interest groups allied with their political beliefs, who have their own agendas. Then they get together and horse-trade with each other, giving up and adding their own pet ideas gathered from their teams until everyone’s at a point where they can vote ‘yay’. The bill passes.

Then what do you think happens to it? The health care bill and the financial bill, along with other regulations coming out of Congress, are increasingly devoid of detail. They are political documents more than technical regulatory documents ready for consumption. To get the exact legislation actually written, these bills are then handed over to the bureaucracy - agencies full of technocrats and bureaucrats and lawyers who are charged with turning them into specific law. They in turn are influenced by other lobbyists and special interests as they turn to industry to seek advice.

In the end, the actual laws that passed are a massive conglomeration of rules that have been heavily distorted by the people who have the ears of Congress and the bureaucracy. That’s largely big business.

For example, Obama set up a ‘jobs’ commission, headed by Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of GE. GE makes wind turbines, CFL light bulbs, and factory equipment. So what did the commission recommend as a ‘jobs creation’ strategy? Why, more windmills, updating factories, and ‘green jobs’, including replacing current light bulbs with CFL’s. What a shock.

In the meantime, GM, which was bailed out by the Obama administration, has this electric car, subsidized by the Obama administration, that no one wants. So who becomes the major purchaser of those cars (at a heavy, government-funded discount)? Why, Obama’s bestest buddy, Jeffrey Immelt. GE becomes the major purchaser of those vehicles, which helps GM’s bottom line and makes Obama’s green plan look better. In return, GE is the largest recipient of ‘stimulus’ dollars. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.

Then the big unions get into it - they funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to Obama’s campaign. In return, they get precedence over bondholders in the GM restructuring, they get rules passed that force stimulus dollars to only go to union employees, and they ensure that a good chunk of the stimulus money is used to insulate union government workers from the effects of the recession - at the expense of everyone else.

Hell, they even get their ‘gold plated insurance’ tax removed from the health care bill. They also go along with the large company’s requests for waivers from Obamacare, which will increase the cost burden on all those companies not connected enough to get their own waivers. In return, they agree to fully support the administration’s other efforts and finance Obama’s re-election campaign.

Big business, big labor, big government. Supposedly three enemies, but in fact they all work together to scratch each other’s backs - at the expense of everyone else. It’s time some of you on the left woke up to the fact that your basic belief system has been hijacked by these people.

Will never happen.

There are always those who want the psychological drug fix of trading liberty for security. And we’re getting closer to the 51% threshold, unfortunately, in this country.

I’ll bet you whatever you want, right now, that when the 1-year waiver comes to close something else will happen (a further extension, a “clarifying of the rules”, etc.) to benefit certain large constituencies over others.

It’s as sure a force of nature as gravity.

I’ll be happy to come back on the Board and eat crow, if I’m wrong.

When it comes to financial market regulation, “liberty” is no virtue.

Words fail me.

I lived in the Congo from 1961-1962, when my father was sent there by the UN. The Congo was broken then (this was during the Katanga secession, sponsored by Union Minere) and has been broken ever since, with the possible exception of the early Mobuto regime before he went bat-shit crazy. The economy of the Congo was never not devastated. The warlords were doing fine before the bill.
Perhaps Sam thinks that the Congo was some paradise before the bill. Actually, millions have died in the past 20 years, millions more have been raped.

Notice that the law doesn’t appear to require 100% assurance that money is not going to warlords, just that some steps are taken. I can only guess that before money was going directly to the warlords. Maybe the companies didn’t know, maybe they didn’t want to know, but maybe, just maybe, they can do some good.

I suppose that 80 years ago or so Sam would have been strongly against laws banning the sale of rope to the Soviet Union. I’m sure he was against sanctions against apartheid era South Africa.

As for unintended consequences, since when haven’t we had to deal with unintended consequence. Look at Iraq. Look at the Bush tax cuts. Look at Greenspan’s resistance to enforcing regulations on the mortgage market. Any new engineering or scientific advance has unintended consequences. Don’t like them - just keep on doing what you are doing, but that has an unintended consequence also.

For health care, the (I hope unintended) consequence of doing what we were doing would be to spend every greater amounts on healthcare for fewer and fewer insured people. Telling everyone to not go to the doctor in order to save money, which seemed to be the Republican plan, would have unintended consequences also.

But the OP must be acknowledged as truly conservative, in that the best thing must be to do nothing.

Actually, all Sam has done is point out the true horror: that the Free Market has been hindered.

Selfishness to the point of effective psychopathy. Profit at any cost to others. The belief that compassion in any form is evil. The belief that the suffering of others is good. The belief that only the rich deserve to be regarded as human. The belief that the future doesn’t matter, only immediate profits. That’s what they believe in.

Talk about unintended consequences destroying the Congo all you want; the conservatives (economic and otherwise) would cheerfully destroy the Congo and everywhere else on purpose. They’d happily murder everyone there for an extra percentage point of profit, and they’d not only not feel sorry they’d feel all self righteously satisfied about it. After all, if it made them a profit that means it’s a virtue.

Who knows what unintended consequences might arise from voting for Libertarian policies? It’s safest to just to maintain the status quo, amirite?

Oh for God’s sake. Do you ever get tired of this nonsense? You do realize it’s self-parodying, right? It’s also hate speech.

Do you ever get tired of trying to pretend that the left and the government is the source of all evil? And you are underlining my point in this thread with your “if it’s because of the market, it’s OK” rhetoric. If “the market” killed everyone in the Congo you’d come on here and claim that somehow it was better than letting the Ultimate Evil of the government intervene.

No, Sam. He’s right. He caught me.

Just yesterday, I

  1. Got up and fixed breakfast for my kids
  2. Went to work, then to the bank to take care of some paperwork
  3. Came home, fixed a little thing on my wife’s car
  4. Dropped by my kids’ school to donate some old camping equipment
  5. Plotted to destroy the Congo and murder innocent people
  6. Had some dinner, chatted with the family
  7. Read a little and went to bed

I could only dedicate about 20 minutes to number 5 on the list above. But hopefully tomorrow I’ll be able to clear a little more time out of my busy day.

Please explain.

You can start by explaining why the financial markets need to be regulated at all, with a brief discussion of fiat money and free banking.

Don’t forget Fannie and Freddie.

You can begin now.

Let me gouge my eyes out with a rusty fork first, and then I’ll get right on that.

Idaho, you keep doing that. You seem very anxious to make a discussion about “fiat money”. Start a thread on it, then, if it means so much to you. You can talk about it to your heart’s content, and anybody who cares to discuss it with you will have an excellent opportunity.

Nah, he goes way beyond that, since it is not like only the government does things with unintended consequences.

And it even fits on a bumper sticker.

Oakland, VNS.

Last Friday a combined force of the DEA, California State Police, and Oakland Police arrested 100 major heroin and cocaine dealers, confiscated over $50 million dollars worth of drugs and over 500 weapons. Today the city is experiencing the unintended consequences of this major raid.

Oakland Sheriff Barney Fife is sitting in his office looking at his budget. “We had never anticipated arrests of this magnitude” he says. “We are out of jail space, but though we were able to house our new prisoners in surrounding towns, we still must pay for them. We do not want these people back on the street, but we might have to lay off some of the police in our force that we just rehired.”

The police are not the only ones feeling the impact of these arrests. Clyde, an addict, is suffering. “Man, I don know anyone who could sell me anything,” he said. The stuff is almost all gone. Any junk out there is lots more than it was last week. My pan handling ain’t gonna make it no more. Shoot, I bet that liquor store down the block got lots of money. Sure you don’t get a taste, man?"

Benicia Bridge, a single mother, is also in trouble. “Sonny brought me the rent money every Sunday sure as clockwork,” she says. “Now the po-pos have locked him up. Unless they let him out I’m going to have to go on welfare, and I know those rich folks don’t like that. Why don’t they just leave him alone to do his business?”

But not everyone is sympathetic. Thurston Q. Grover for one. "I think arresting pushers is infringing on their ability to do business. They are not doing any harm. After all, I wouldn’t get addicted, would you? Of course not, so there is no issue here. In any case, if I ever were curious about a drug, I could look up its pharmacology on PubMed. I just don’t understand why everyone doesn’t do it. All the information is out there. This is just a matter of people making choices. If the government can afford all the effort to make these arrests, it clearly has too much. The solution is clearly to cut taxes some more.

Something doesn’t add up:

Presumably the US wasn’t the only buyer of Congolese minerals. So when they pulled out, prices fell, then other buyers (ie China) moved in, and presumably prices would rise again.

It sucks that the US stopped buying their minerals, but it seems other people are okay with it, so did we actually destroy their economy? Or cause a short term blip?

Also seems like there is money to be made going in and figuring out a way to “rate” the various mineral sources for their degree of war lord connections.

Lastly, it seems like an easy work around if a foreign company buys a bunch of minerals from the Congo, then cuts it up and mixes it with minerals from other countries, then sells it as Triple A, I mean conflict free minerals. Worked for China when Japan put bans on fish imports.

I don’t understand. Surely such power is in the hands of someone; I don’t see a way to ensure greater financial liberty for myself, other than, I suppose, to join government or become the head of some great company.

I mean, i’m on the left, and I agree all those various powerful groups have set up systems to ensure their continued dominance. Of course they have. It just reminds me about that old Churchill quote about democracy. It’s terrible, but I don’t see other options as providing much in the way of acceptable alternatives.

He is also famous for “The Americans can be relied upon to do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else.”