Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

Dear Mr. Landes:

Dear Mr. Landes:
I agree with you on a variety of levels. I believe that the general population who make up the "climate" have decided to "end the game". I also believe that WE THE PEOPLE are the referees. When the players are out of bounds, we vote them out and clean the court. However, in the current era, the referees must not only carry the ball, but run with it. The players should be sidelined. The field however can not be closed. We get back to the basics and fundamentals of the game and recognize that the game is no game at all, but literally a life and death struggle of a republic Benjamin Franklin himself described as great...if only we can keep it.

Hope you had a wonderful weekend Mr. Landes. It is always a though provoking pleasure to hear your comments.

Will Griffith
www.griffithcorp.com



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

:-) I`d only argue that it`s the government, composed of election-oriented politicians who are the referees.

I would say you`re pretty much right on the money as far as today`s perception, especially as portrayed by the mainstream media.  I think our forefathers and the framers of our country intended WE THE PEOPLE to be referee. Regardless, your point is well taken and since you are the Master Curmudgeon, I yield the floor.

Have a great week coming. Aly and I send our best wishes to you Mr. Landes.

Will Griffith
www.griffithcorp.com



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

I subscribe to the New York Times online, and I just checked the latest headlines. One of them is on this very topic. Enjoy.

-------------------------

Making limitless possibilities much more limited.

Thank you Matt. I will certainly check it out. And thank you for joining the dialogue.

Will



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

"In Latest Plan for Banks, U.S. Could Demand Voting Stake" New York Times, Feb 23, 2009

To Matt and Mr. Landes both, thank you for the link. I have read the article and no matter how they spin it nationalization is nationalization is nationalization.

They are painting its as `nationalization-lite`, but it is what IT IS!

Thank you gentlemen.

Will



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

I was under the impression the nationalization was temporary. I figured the US government was taking the role of an investor. They`d give the bank money, earn a seat on the board, and then once they got a certain return on investment, they`d seek an exit. After all, the intent is that the government will eventually turn a profit on this investment. I doubt the government really wants to micromanage dozens of corporations, long term. I think temporary nationalization of the corporations involved in the bailout is a wise thing. It`s the sort of oversight that should`ve been given on the first round of bailouts. Because there was none, the first round of bailouts went to the retirement funds of CEOs. It was a disgrace.

-------------------------

Making limitless possibilities much more limited.

Matt,

That is the impression they are giving and it would certainly be nice to believe them. As I stated in my prior blog post, the road toward nationalization is a slippery-slope. Once we, as Americans, point ourselves in that direction I would predict that it would be like a virus that spreads (or threatens to spread) into other areas of the private sector.

Keep in mind that the federal income tax was suppose to be a temporary way to pay for the cost of the Civil War. The Social Security Number was never intended to be used as a form of identification. In fact, my grandfather still has his original social security card. On the bottom of the card is the disclaimer `This shall not be used for purposes of identification". These examples too, the government told us, were only temporary. Trying telling that to the IRS or the company who wants your social security number to verify you exist.

I appreciate your position but there are enough regulatory laws on the books to enforce the banks into fiscal responsibility. Nationalization is certainly not the answer. When have we ever been happy with the way the government spends and regulates our money?

It is a pleasure to take time out for dialogue with you. I am not saying you are wrong in your perceptions. I am simply saying the position of nationalization is wrong for the country.

Best Wishes,
Will Griffith, Chairman
The Griffith Corporation
www.griffithcorp.com
888-828-5355



-------------------------

Will Griffith
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/business/25markets.html?_r=1&hp

-------------------------

Making limitless possibilities much more limited.