|
 danielx
whatup!
Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 3,968
|
 Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: zappaisgod]
#10873965 - 08/17/09 12:01 AM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Which is, of course, bull shit. Big companies are owned by shareholders, many of which are pension funds responsible for ensuring the retirement accounts of millions of workers. They have an obligation to protect their investment and a right to petition the government just like anybody else. Are you, too, a Napolean? Some companies are more equal under the law than others?
I understand a lot of things that you don't, apparently. At least one of them is the Constitutional right to petition the government. Corporations, no matter how large, are still owned by individuals who have the collective right to be heard. We don't have lobbyists because the politicians love them. We have lobbyists because it is unconstitutional to forbid them. It's a free speech issue. You, too, can lobby Congress. Knock yourself out.
sure they have the right to lobby, but if push comes to shove and new regulations get passed that effectively disable other businesses in the process, can we agree this is to be bullshit?
The government shouldn't be bribed into doing anything.
Regulations shouldn't be put on big, nor small business. This should not be the role of the government and such tyranny is harmful to a free and productive society.
--------------------
'Learning is like rowing upstream: not to advance is to drop back.' ~Chinese Proverb
|
 Moronicus
smokehousebacon.
Registered: 05/13/09
Posts: 4,368
Last seen: 2 days, 11 hours
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Ferris]
#10874200 - 08/17/09 01:15 AM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
we could also solve world hunger by simply killing off all the starving and make them into compost for our crops.
--------------------
BACON RANCH, FUCK YEAH
A post about m00nshine
Anonymous #6 said:
Yes, it is. The shine stands for his job title, which is Shoe Shiner, the moon stands for the time he comes out to be a nigger, which is best suited for the negroid camouflage.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 2 hours, 51 minutes
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: danielx]
#10874733 - 08/17/09 07:30 AM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
danielx said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Which is, of course, bull shit. Big companies are owned by shareholders, many of which are pension funds responsible for ensuring the retirement accounts of millions of workers. They have an obligation to protect their investment and a right to petition the government just like anybody else. Are you, too, a Napolean? Some companies are more equal under the law than others?
I understand a lot of things that you don't, apparently. At least one of them is the Constitutional right to petition the government. Corporations, no matter how large, are still owned by individuals who have the collective right to be heard. We don't have lobbyists because the politicians love them. We have lobbyists because it is unconstitutional to forbid them. It's a free speech issue. You, too, can lobby Congress. Knock yourself out.
sure they have the right to lobby, but if push comes to shove and new regulations get passed that effectively disable other businesses in the process, can we agree this is to be bullshit?
Like public option health care reform? Like health insurance mandates for small business?
Just because you don't like how it's used does not mean that you can forbid a basic Constitutional right. What you can do is vote the assholes who pass the legislation out of office.Quote:
The government shouldn't be bribed into doing anything.
Giving campaign contributions to politicians who support your interests is not bribery and is a fundamental right.Quote:
Regulations shouldn't be put on big, nor small business. This should not be the role of the government and such tyranny is harmful to a free and productive society.
You are, mostly, correct. Some regulation is necessary for some businesses. Insurance and banking and finance for sure. Licensing requirements and insurance requirements are also reasonable. Do you know what isn't reasonable? Making employers responsible for acting as tax collection agents. The people should actually see what they are being forced to pay. Most people don't even know that they pay twice as much for Soc Sec and MC/MA. It also consumes an enormous amount of resources for companies to comply with all the tax laws.
--------------------
|
danielx
whatup!
Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 3,968
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: zappaisgod]
#10875895 - 08/17/09 12:27 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Some regulation is necessary for some businesses. Insurance and banking and finance for sure
elaborate. It is to my understanding that over regulation is what put us in the mess we are into today, not lack of regulation.
Nobody would make poor business decisions and give loans to high risk home buyers if big brother wasn't telling them to and assuring them if shit hit the fan they would step in.
A free market with no regulation always triumphs.
--------------------
'Learning is like rowing upstream: not to advance is to drop back.' ~Chinese Proverb
|
Ferris
PsychedelicJourneyman
Registered: 03/12/06
Posts: 11,529
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: danielx]
#10875930 - 08/17/09 12:33 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The CRA didn't make anybody make any loans, that's an outright lie. If you look up the CRA inspection records, you'd see that it hadn't been enforced since 2001. There was no mandate to make the loans, the mechanism of encouragement was that the banks in question wouldn't be allowed to expand into prime markets if they were given bad ratings (ie if they were outright red-lining).
The Bush administration did away with a large number of post-depression SEC regulations, and allowed tranches to be created. This led to higher volatility in the market and run-away bubble formation.
So the banks used the CRA as an excuse to make the loans in the first place, while they profited and passed the liability onto others.
--------------------
Discuss Politics
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 2 hours, 51 minutes
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: danielx]
#10875954 - 08/17/09 12:40 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
danielx said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Some regulation is necessary for some businesses. Insurance and banking and finance for sure
elaborate. It is to my understanding that over regulation is what put us in the mess we are into today, not lack of regulation.
The mess was not due to requiring banks to accurately report about what they are doing with depositors money. It is because they were coerced to lend money to questionable borrowers. I don't consider that regulation. If the people who borrowed money had continued to pay it back there would be NO crisis. Likewise insurance companies should be required to maintain a certain percentage of their assets in highly safe and liquid form so they can pay off in the event of policyholder loss.Quote:
Nobody would make poor business decisions and give loans to high risk home buyers if big brother wasn't telling them to and assuring them if shit hit the fan they would step in.
Correct, but I don't put that under the umbrella of "regulation". I consider it social engineering. Which I abhor.Quote:
A free market with no regulation always triumphs.
I think it's important to have protections against fraud. Not just punishment, but a requirement for transparency and conservative investment to avoid it. Of course, we often end up with the gang of watchdogs being recruited from the gang of wolves.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 2 hours, 51 minutes
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Ferris]
#10876074 - 08/17/09 01:01 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ferris said:
The CRA didn't make anybody make any loans, that's an outright lie. If you look up the CRA inspection records, you'd see that it hadn't been enforced since 2001. There was no mandate to make the loans, the mechanism of encouragement was that the banks in question wouldn't be allowed to expand into prime markets if they were given bad ratings (ie if they were outright red-lining).
Bullshit
http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/
Further, redlining is sound business practice. If a community has a 20% default rate on loans I wouldn't lend money there. Nor should anyone else. There are numerous other examples in that link that have nothing to do with redlining as well. Flat out extortionate behavior. "If yopu don't play ball in shitty neighborhoods we won't let you play ball in good ones". Extortion in the name of social engineering. By the way, how do those neighborhoods look now? Quote:
The Bush administration did away with a large number of post-depression SEC regulations, and allowed tranches to be created. This led to higher volatility in the market and run-away bubble formation.
Which regulations? There have always been bubbles and always will be. A lot of people made a shitload of money in the bubbles, not all of them bankers. People who sold their property just before the burst made a fortune. People who buy now can get in at the bottom of the market. Smart timing. Try it.Quote:
So the banks used the CRA as an excuse to make the loans in the first place, while they profited and passed the liability onto others.
Passed it on? Some of it got absorbed by the twin idiot social engineers at Fanny and Freddy, equally culpable to the CRA. They shouldn't exist, but the banks eventually got hammered themselves.
Here's an indisputable truth. If people had paid back the money they borrowed there would be no crisis. You do not have a right to borrow money any more than I should be compelled to lend it to you.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 27 days, 19 hours
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: zappaisgod]
#10876741 - 08/17/09 02:51 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Chris Dodd recieved around 148 g-notes from Fannie & Freddie. Barney Frank was diddling someone from either Fannie or Freddie. Both vehemently supported the crap that caused the housing bubble.
You wax philosophical about economic bubbles, care to elaborate on what causes them?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 2 hours, 51 minutes
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Mr.Al]
#10876764 - 08/17/09 02:54 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Irrational exuberance. Tulips. Campaign contributions are not bribes and should not be curtailed in any way. As I said earlier, Dodd should be prosecuted for his Friend of Angelo loans and the phony valuation on his Irish cottage.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 27 days, 19 hours
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: zappaisgod]
#10876812 - 08/17/09 03:02 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Irrational exuberance. Tulips. Campaign contributions are not bribes and should not be curtailed in any way. As I said earlier, Dodd should be prosecuted for his Friend of Angelo loans and the phony valuation on his Irish cottage.
Meh. I was asking the question in a broader context. I will state that it is artificially low interest rates and fractional reserve banking.
Look into Austrian Business Cycle Theory for in depth information on that.
Greenspan was one of the prime architects of the housing bubble. The stupid ninny then blamed the crash on "irrational exuberance".
You mention tulips, were you referring to the historical example of Dutch Tulip Mania?
|
Poid
deBunker
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,359
Loc: SF Bay Area 
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Yrat]
#10877036 - 08/17/09 03:46 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ferris said:
Really, as minimum wage drops back to a dollar, the number of people that can afford to buy a home drops drastically to pretty much nobody.
The minimum wage today is the highest it's ever been...
Quote:
Qubit said:
The amount of people without housing is infinitesimal and largley based off their own choices (even if they are poor choices due to mental health and substance abuse issues).
You are barking up the wrong tree.
Maybe so, but the amount of people struggling with rent is definitely not negligible. 
Quote:
Yrat said:
houses are a good that have a market just like any other good. as such, they are subject to the laws of supply and demand. if housing is too expensive for the poor, it simply means there is demand from actual working people who are willing to shell out the cash for a house.
you are proposing to completely do away with supply and demand. what other markets would you like to destroy? should everyone who can't afford a car get one too?
Do you have any evidence that affordable housing significantly hurts the market?
--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. -- Bob Dylan   fireworks_god said:It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 27 days, 19 hours
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Poid]
#10877086 - 08/17/09 03:56 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Poid said:
Quote:
Ferris said:
Really, as minimum wage drops back to a dollar, the number of people that can afford to buy a home drops drastically to pretty much nobody.
The minimum wage today is the highest it's ever been...
Quote:
Qubit said:
The amount of people without housing is infinitesimal and largley based off their own choices (even if they are poor choices due to mental health and substance abuse issues).
You are barking up the wrong tree.
Maybe so, but the amount of people struggling with rent is definitely not negligible.
Quote:
Yrat said:
houses are a good that have a market just like any other good. as such, they are subject to the laws of supply and demand. if housing is too expensive for the poor, it simply means there is demand from actual working people who are willing to shell out the cash for a house.
you are proposing to completely do away with supply and demand. what other markets would you like to destroy? should everyone who can't afford a car get one too?
Do you have any evidence that affordable housing significantly hurts the market?
You first have to examine WHY housing is not affordable before you roll up your sleeves and get to work. Diagnose before treatment unless you want to kill the patient.
|
Ferris
PsychedelicJourneyman
Registered: 03/12/06
Posts: 11,529
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Poid]
#10877196 - 08/17/09 04:13 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Poid said:
Quote:
Ferris said:
Really, as minimum wage drops back to a dollar, the number of people that can afford to buy a home drops drastically to pretty much nobody.
The minimum wage today is the highest it's ever been..
He was advocating his anarcho-capitalism libertarianism bullshit, as if it'll put more people in their own homes.
Minimum wage isn't high because businesses thought they've be nice. It took centuries of struggle from the worker class to gain the political clout necessary to make the government enforce a minimum wage as high as it is.
--------------------
Discuss Politics
|
danielx
whatup!
Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 3,968
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Poid]
#10877202 - 08/17/09 04:15 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Poid said:
The minimum wage today is the highest it's ever been...
but its all relative. Minimum wage is $8 an hour in california, seems pretty good right? But with 9% sales tax, and high cost of living its shit on a stick.
You could make minimum wage $1000 a hour, but it wouldn't make anyone rich. It would do the exact opposite and make the money we already have worthless.
--------------------
'Learning is like rowing upstream: not to advance is to drop back.' ~Chinese Proverb
|
Ferris
PsychedelicJourneyman
Registered: 03/12/06
Posts: 11,529
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: danielx]
#10877212 - 08/17/09 04:16 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
danielx said:
Quote:
Poid said:
The minimum wage today is the highest it's ever been...
but its all relative. Minimum wage is $8 an hour in california, seems pretty good right? But with 9% sales tax, and high cost of living its shit on a stick.
You could make minimum wage $1000 a hour, but it wouldn't make anyone rich. It would do the exact opposite and make the money we already have worthless.
There are too many variables to make a statement like that have any legitimacy.
--------------------
Discuss Politics
|
danielx
whatup!
Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 3,968
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Ferris]
#10877217 - 08/17/09 04:17 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
oh? Guess ill take your word for it, since you said so.
--------------------
'Learning is like rowing upstream: not to advance is to drop back.' ~Chinese Proverb
|
Ferris
PsychedelicJourneyman
Registered: 03/12/06
Posts: 11,529
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: danielx]
#10877275 - 08/17/09 04:27 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
danielx said:
oh? Guess ill take your word for it, since you said so.
Who's to say the money supply wouldn't be raised proportionally? Who's to say it wouldn't be raised even higher? It's illogical to assume a minimum wage raise occurs in a vacuum.
--------------------
Discuss Politics
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 27 days, 19 hours
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Ferris]
#10877440 - 08/17/09 04:54 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ferris said:
Quote:
danielx said:
oh? Guess ill take your word for it, since you said so.
Who's to say the money supply wouldn't be raised proportionally? Who's to say it wouldn't be raised even higher? It's illogical to assume a minimum wage raise occurs in a vacuum.
Indeed, I would posit that minimum wage is symptomatic of money supply inflation.
There would be no need for a minimum wage if there was not shenanigans with the money supply.
The minimum wage is increased after prices respond to inflation of the money supply. The problem is that the minimum wage can not be increased to the extent needed to achieve parity with the increase in money supply without wiping out business due to the fact that increases in the money supply benefit certain groups in ways that are fantastically disproportionate.
Increases in the money supply cause greater gaps between the ridiculously well connected wealthy and the increasingly poorer working class.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 2 hours, 51 minutes
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: Mr.Al]
#10877611 - 08/17/09 05:26 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Irrational exuberance. Tulips. Campaign contributions are not bribes and should not be curtailed in any way. As I said earlier, Dodd should be prosecuted for his Friend of Angelo loans and the phony valuation on his Irish cottage.
Meh. I was asking the question in a broader context. I will state that it is artificially low interest rates and fractional reserve banking.
That would mean you were asking in a narrower sense. There was nothing artificial about the interest rates.Quote:
Look into Austrian Business Cycle Theory for in depth information on that.
Greenspan was one of the prime architects of the housing bubble. The stupid ninny then blamed the crash on "irrational exuberance".
You mention tulips, were you referring to the historical example of Dutch Tulip Mania?
Exactly. Bubbles are an intrinsic feature of any economic system. Do not forget that many people made shitloads of money on the bubble. Shitoads in spades. And it would never have burst if not for the fact that bums were allowed to participate. And by bums, I don't mean Greenspan and bankers.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 27 days, 19 hours
|
Re: We could feed and house everyone in America [Re: zappaisgod]
#10877691 - 08/17/09 05:38 PM (2 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
W.T.F.?
Interest rates are set by the federal reserve. They ARE artificially low!
If said "bums" were not allowed to participate there would be no housing bubble in the first place!
Bubbles are intrinsic of fractional-reserve-banking- inflate-the-money-supply-until-collapse-economies!
Greenspan created the housing bubble intentionally!
Keynesian economists think economic bubbles and malinvestment are swell ideas! After the bubble they make bursts they immediately set about creating a new one (Nasdaq bubble, followed by dot.com bubble, followed by housing bubble...)
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
