For instance if government involvement cripples rail travel, why do the trains provide such good service at such reasonable costs in countries with heavy government regulation on that rail travel (much of Europe)?

BTW, CRA regs also covered communities that were underserved because they were/are small and rural. The beneficiaries of those services were mostly poor and white. And again the repayment rate on CRA loans has not been shown to be significantly less than for other loans.

Still waiting for the cites that refute Lockwood and Froehlich (2007). I won't hold my breath waiting.

You have provided no evidence that government involvement was at fault in whatever failures you saw there and you have certainly provided no evidence to support the assertion that the general economy does better sans regulation.

Another one going to great lengths to avoid the obvious.

Call me when you get back to the planet.

I've already cited several examples.

No, you have not.
You have cited some examples of particular industries that you feel suffered due to government involvement. You have provided no evidence that government involvement was at fault in whatever failures you saw there and you have certainly provided no evidence to support the assertion that the general economy does better sans regulation. That would be a first step in showing that we as citizens would be better off with less regulations on business.

I have. Their postulation is overcome by several other works on the subject.

Then cite them. Web site rantings don't count. Please provide something peer reviewed.

So why was it regarded by those pressig for it as in majority, a bill to overcome racism?

Wait, did you just prove his point?

I know that it is shocking to you, but there are/were communities that were underserved for reasons other than the credit worthiness of the residents. You (or anyone else) has not shown evidence of higher default rates in these communities or these loans. Until you can do that your argument will hold no water.

So why was it regarded by those pressig for it as in majority, a bill to overcome racism?

but I guessing you really don't have any data

I've already cited several examples.

Perhaps you should read Lockwood and Froehlich*

I have. Their postulation is overcome by several other works on the subject.

I figured as much. I figure the truth makes you shrink.

Nice try.

WHich of course is why you also ignored the quote of it I posted here.

No. I found that when I ctrl F'ed for republican and it is one of the couple of references I mentioned (Rs won't stand up to Ds and liberal Rs must go). Your only criticism of republicans has been that they are too nice and go along with the big mean liberals and that some are too liberal. That is not what Steve was talking about in his comment that began this tangent and you (should) know it.

Meaning loans to people who couldn't afford it.

I know that it is shocking to you, but there are/were communities that were underserved for reasons other than the credit worthiness of the residents. You (or anyone else) has not shown evidence of higher default rates in these communities or these loans. Until you can do that your argument will hold no water.

Our economy works best when government stays out of the way... and works in direct resverse proportion to the degree which government gets involved.

Certainly untrue if one bases this on TFP or GDP growth in the US. Admittedly technology throws a monkey wrench into the equation, but I guessing you really don't have any data to back up your assertion anyway so that's largely irrelevant.

Do a little research, and you'll note that flares ...

Perhaps you should read Lockwood and Froehlich* to begin understanding why solar flares do not explain current climate change.

* available free through the PDF or HTML link on that page

But those changes aren't what climatologists are talking about when they talk about global warming.

Irony abounds here; a target rich environment. I guess the biggest target to be, it's the peak of the sunspot cycle where Gore gets his figures from.

But of course all this is sidetracking us from the main topic. To link back...

These same people who are claiming the end of the world due to global warming.... that is to say, the left... these are interestingly, the very same who we trusted with the compartively simple task of maintaining a mere economy. Given the parallels between this and everything else government tries to do, including the aforementioned Passenger Railroads. Passenger Airlines, Healthcare, etc, etc, please, I beg you, don't wonder if I don't consider the prospects for their manangement of the 'environment' to be any better, or, given our current conditon, their alarmed cries of 'crisis' to have any greater accuracy.

How far back does meaningful data on solar flares go? My guess is not very. Got Facts?

Records on solar activity probably go back further than direct recordings of global temperatures do. Don't discount something just because it appears to contradict your point of view (especially in this case, because the evidence doesn't actually contradict your point of view).

Always have. Do a little research, and you'll note that flares are at a 50 year low just now. And what are the scientists predicting as a result? Global COOLING.

I have done the research and, contrary to your believe, so have climatologists. Yes, solar activity directly effects global temperature, and yes we see a cyclic change in global temperature that corresponds to them. But those changes aren't what climatologists are talking about when they talk about global warming. If you plot the averages over the course of all of those cycles, you get an ascending line, that is what they are talking about when they talk about global warming.

Read and learn.

Short version: Usful records go back to the middel 1600's. Very detailed records go back to the middle 1800's.

There are records that apparently pre-date Man, if you'd like to go back quite that far.

Solar Flares cause global warming now?

Always have.

How far back does meaningful data on solar flares go? My guess is not very. Got Facts?

Flares cause global warming now?

Always have. Do a little research, and you'll note that flares are at a 50 year low just now. And what are the scientists predicting as a result? Global COOLING.

Sorry, could not read the whole rant,

I figured as much. I figure the truth makes you shrink. WHich of course is why you also ignored the quote of it I posted here.

No. It was concerned with getting banking and mortgage services to the underserved

Meaning loans to people who couldn't afford it. There's no way around this one.

When and where was there a free market that was not 'fooled with' by the government?

Lack of a perfect situation doesn't defeat the argument. Our economy works best when government stays out of the way... and works in direct resverse proportion to the degree which government gets involved.

I'm not so sure about flares, but some one scientist has implicating Solar cycles.

Global warming is a trend, not a cycle, and Mars isn't experiencing global warming, only regional warming.

How did you get off track on Global warming?

Sorry, Bithead's fault.