[CaptainHaplo]

I actually read all 5 - and 3 of them make sense. Phelps, Lucas and Samuelson all have valid points. They are correct that that there should be some regulation of the banking sector when it comes to them loaning money they don't actually have. However, notice all three promote LIMITED regulation. I concur. The other two - especially Stiglitz, was to concerned about laying blame (all on the US btw) and pulling emotional heartstrings with his talk of the human fact to actually talk about fixes.

However, one thing that I do think that the three above mentioned missed is that going forward - regardless of regulation or oversight, these banks and other institutions have to accept the RISK that they have passed forward. In essence - no bailing them out.

Right now there is talk of letting the "Big 3" automakers in the US simply fail. The liberals - who garner support from the unions - won't allow it. They will continue to subsidize the 3 - who will continue to do business the same old way - failing to modernize so they could truly compete.

This is WHY a true deregulated market has never happened - because deregulation creates a risk/reward structure where low risk is low reward, high risk is high reward - and each investor or company decides how much risk they want. They are allowed to fail. Yet in today's business climate - if your part of a certain structure, your not going to fail - because you will be subsidized or "bailed out". Thats not a true deregulated market. Until change is enacted that allows failure for those who choose to run their businesses badly, you will never get a self-correcting market.

The Automotive Industry is just one here in the US - another is the Airline Industry. If they didn't have their yearly subsidies, neither would be in business today due to the way they choose to operate. I say stop funding their stupidity....