Vatican document calls for global authority to regulate mark

Post Reply New Topic

Why everyone against that? I think this is agood idea.

I think the world should aim for a democratic global government. It could put a end to wars, grealtly reduce inequalities and allow the protection of human rights to everyone.

One world government? One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all, And in the darkness bind them.''

No thank you. Several governments o.k. One government never, ever.

ruveyn

How well is the current IMF working? Or for an even more classic example the UN? It'll be one more brood of vipers, each membership with its own agenda - likely 40% for free market, 25 to 30% for socialism, and 15 to 20% really wanting Sharia-based econ, and the rest just looking for bribes.

I think this is where we realize that its simply wiser to have perhaps international accounting standards (for both less corruption and ease of format) rather then creating a big log-jam and pretending its progress. We've already got one Palace of Versailles (the UN), two is just redundant.

Keep in mind that this document isn't really something endorsed by the entire Vatican. It's basically the opinion of a single cardinal and bears no actual authority.

Good point. It's time to reform the IMF so it's more accountable to stakeholders rather than just multinational corporations.



It's amazing how you can talk about excess and Versailles style waste when it comes to an organization whose operating budget is smaller than the Tokyo Fire Department. Given the resources and very limited authority it has and the fact that the US, Russia, and others on the Security Council can effectively veto anything that opposes their interests, and the sheer diversity of places it has to represent, the UN is doing a pretty good job.

The main problem with modern organization is that organizations like the IMF have a lot more power than organizations like the International Labour Organization.

Yeah, eh? I mean, calling for people to police financial entities that have skirted regulations and laws in various countries by erecting a global regulatory authority obviously ranks right up their with covering up child sex abuse or the inquisition.

Let me express the sentiment of this thread by welcoming our multinational overlords. Please feel free to pollute, corrupt government, violate labour law, and do all kinds of other fun things because you have the ability to throw a temper-tantrum and threaten to move capital outside the country anytime someone threatens to police you! Hooray for the new era of globalized anarchy, boo to the Vatican for doing something right for once and calling for the enforcement of law on a global scale. Yeah for globalized neo-feudalism!

Lol, I'm not talking about lavish expenditure, just what its ultimate worth is (ie. think about the motivation of why the Palace of Versailles existed - you'll get my drift then)

If the rest of the vatican isn't endorsing this they should come out and say so.

It would never put an end to wars, it would spread them and cause resentment like you would not believe.

Also, if it is a one-world deal, there's nowhere to hide and nowhere to run. It would far more likely than not be authoritarian/totalitarian too.

But you would say some of these things because you're from Québec, right?

Or, in particular, the hideous experiment that is the European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

It does not need to the guidelines for reading the document were released along with it... Too bad no one actually read those. The paper was a mostly silly thought bubble from one of the more liberal councils within the Church. It is not a Vatican document, because neither the congrigation for the doctine of the faith nor the Pope said anything about it. As a general rule social justice councils within the Church can say some pretty random things from time to time but they do not consitute statements of dogma or the position of the magisterium.

Some people seem to be uncritically assailing this proposal in view of its source.

But if the financial crisis taught us one thing, it is that for all markets' efficiency they are not benevolent and they are not wise. The vacuum in prudential supervision in the United States, the United Kingdom, Eire and Iceland has created astonishing fiscal and monetary challenges for government and people the world over. It should be absolutely clear that regulation of financial markets is necessity.

Now, that's not to say that such regulation needs to be global (but national systems do need to be able to interrelate) and a financial transaction levy seems to me to be wrongheaded. But if this paper can contribute to a discussion about how to regulate markets to prevent a repetition of the fiasco of 2007-2008, then I am all in favour.

The OWS people have at least proven one thing to me, colleges are horridly - horridly - overinflated both in pay and value, in a way they've been blackmailing the populous for more and more money while offering a worse and worse product.

As for the problems with what we call crony capitalism where the politicians, bankers, and speculators are all in bed - its a nightmare scenario. Newt Gingrich was on the Bill Bennet show this morning and commented that what we're seeing with OWS and polls showing that 2/3rds of the US population believe that the rich are unjustly rewarded - he made some points on this that made a lot of sense: 1) The American public watched the financial meltdown where all of the CEO's and high rollers who benefited from and endorsed capitalism were the same ones asking for bailouts - ie. they wanted capitalism on the way up and socialism on the way down 2) Adam Smith in his writings even indicated that people inherently want what's 'fair' and that capitalism only works when its both a transparent process and when those involved believe that the other players in the marker - especially at higher levels - are playing honestly; which we clearly don't have right now. TBH I think he could have posted his thoughts on here under a different name and gotten quite a bit of praise so long as no one knew who he was.