Without ever having held political office, Nader has had a tremendous political impact by advocating for improved consumer safety through seat belts, air bags, product labeling, and helping 100 organizations become watchdogs over corporate, government and environmental corruption.
Nader's role in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections fueled controversy, and he's set to challenge the two-party system again this fall as he runs for president for the fifth time-The Commonwealth Club of California
RALPH NADER has helped us drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breathe better air, drink cleaner water, and work in safer environments for more than four decades. The crusading attorney first made headlines in 1965 with his book Unsafe at Any Speed, a scathing indictment that lambasted the auto industry for producing unsafe vehicles. Many lives have been saved by Nader’s involvement in the recall of millions of unsafe consumer products, including defective motor vehicles, and in the protection of laborers and the environment. By starting dozens of citizen groups, Ralph Nader has created an atmosphere of corporate and governmental accountability. Ralph Nader’s books include, In Pursuit of Justice, The Ralph Nader Reader, The Good Fight and The Seventeen Traditions. Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! is Nader’s first work of fiction.
Tabitha Soren is an award-winning reporter and television anchor. She is perhaps best known for MTV's Choose or Lose presidential election coverage, which garnered a Peabody award and secured her position as chief political correspondent for Choose or Lose in 1996.
Presidential candidate Ralph Nader talks about how deregulation of the financial sector encouraged corporate greed and corruption. He argues for public hearings before passing a huge bailout that should include new regulations and specifically help prudent institutions and savers, not speculators.
Presidential candidate Ralph Nader says third party candidates face an uphill battle because, according to a conversation with Mike Bloomberg, 30% of voters will support their party’s nominee no matter who it is. He believes voters would serve themselves well to vote for people they believe in instead of categories.
icouce - You're saying that federal legislation is made by people opposed to business profits? The politicians whose campaigns are financed by the very industries they "regulate"? And the lobbyists who help write - or who just write - the legislation, are they secretly anti-business? The former CEOs who go to DC to run the regulatory agencies responsible for their former - and future - businesses? They have financial interests in those businesses, and they secretly want to hurt them? And you think there's a free market? Are there bailouts in a free market? Bailouts by liberals, bailouts by conservatives? A "free market" where the government (aka military) is used to protect "US interests"?
Free markets did not cause this failure, government economic intervention did.
Mr. Nader is of base, greed is not a systemic condition, it is a human condition. In a socialist/command economy, human greed is demonstrably no less a factor in economic decisions than in a freewheeling capitalist market – ask the Russian. However, it is in any case a straw man. Free markets did not cause this failure, government economic intervention did.
The elephant in the room no one seems to be talking about is the “regulatory” effect of an extremely complex tax code incentivizing behavior that would not otherwise occur in an open and free market – entering into contractual obligations without full understanding can only occur in an environment where intervening government “incentives” are present . Remember, one man’s “incentive” is another man’s “loophole” and vise versa. In addition, 40+ years of profligate credit, government budget deficits and Keynesian monetary expansion coupled with the 1992 Community Redevelopment Act mandating loans to “underserved” minorities and others of dubious financial merit have all contributed to market faithlessness in our ability to conduct our financial affairs soberly. Yet, there is wonder and incredulity expressed by pundits at the lack of confidence exhibited by these “broken markets”. Moreover, Federal Reserve actions lowering interest rates to unwarranted levels -- an economic boom accompanied by falling interest rates to all-time lows -- served the interests of its shareholders not of the nation, by providing the liquidity needed for these dubious loans.
All these were government/quasi-government actions not laissez-faire capitalism run amuck. On the contrary, markets are punishing exactly the kind of behavior one expects them to punish – yes Mr. Friedman, you did tell us so, even if Mr. Nader has conveniently forgotten. In addition, if all that were not enough, the market’s reaction to every government action of the last six months in this regard, and in particular of the last two weeks, is ample evidence that no one with any sense has a scintilla of faith that the government knows what the heck it is doing – but markets are broken. Do tell!
Your right Ralph,
But I remember President Reagan deregulating everything, killing unions starting with the airline industry with the union in Patco.
The Republicans and Democrats are equally to blame, and I'm thinking very seriously to vote for you, I don't like the other two guys, I think we'd get more of the same if we got one of them.