Nick, you want to starve children for being born to poor parents? Every civilized nation has some form of social welfare, even the Roman Empire. If we went to a pure heartless meritocracy, I bet you would not enjoy it very much at all- another one with the “Welfair”, and too cowardly to use your real name.

BWAHHH!!!!! I can’t come up with a counter to his argument, so I’ll comment on spelling and grammar.

Also to seriouslymarcus—you are making the same tired argument that were made in 1993 when President Clinton initiated his Stimulus Plan that led to the large economic growth. I think it is time to accept that McCain lost. I hope your company has an EAP. You should give them a call.

First off, you don’t “borrow” money to someone. You lend it.

“Rate cuts would have worked had we not had the loose borrowing requirements fanny and freddie imposed on the banks. (you had to borrow money to everyone and you couldn’t discriminate on people who appeared to not be credit worthy (in comparioson to other decades)” Gimme a break. First off, explain how rate cuts would have worked? Second, banks didn’t “have to lend” to anybody. They operated on an “originate to distribute” model which traded spread revenue for fee revenue. They could make more money by lending and selling and lending again, so they were incented to originate as much as they possibly could to generate more fees. There was a lack of accountability in the system which left the rating agencies – who had no skin in the game – the sole arbiters of credit. You so don’t understand of which you speak.

Cramer’s “philosophy” in a nutshell: buy in a rising market, sell in a sinking market. A surefire method to lose your ass on Wall Street.