|
 zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
 Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress?  [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#21082854 - 01/07/15 03:26 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And a meteor could land on your head and little green men walk out of it and eat your eardrums.
That's what AIG said when they sold mortgage derivatives.
Tell me what is going on with AIG today?
Here's what went on with AIG:
AIG sold mortgage derivatives to anyone that would buy them, selling WAY more than they could possibly afford to pay if mortgages went bad. Then mortgages went bad and AIG was going bankrupt. But that meant everyone that did business with AIG would lose their money, and also go bankrupt, which meant that other companies that dealt with those companies would go bankrupt, and so on.
The Government, realizing that this would cause a Great Depression, risked $180 billion in taxpayer money hoping to stop this chain reaction, and took an 80% stake in AIG in the largest government bailout of a private company in U.S. history.
Over time, AIG sold off it's valuable subsidiaries and was able to pay the Government back. Crisis somewhat averted thanks to the US Government.
So you are now supporting Government bailouts of failed private companies?
So you don't know.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389994/5-reasons-govt-might-lose-aig-lawsuit-tim-cavanaugh
Try to keep up, will ya. The government made a fortune on AIG.
--------------------
|
 luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#21082943 - 01/07/15 03:46 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
imachavel said:
Why should the government bail out a company people that shouldn't exist?
Fixed that for you.
That too. 
Right after the Government bailout, AIG execs received amazing bonuses.
Them too, but also societal leeches.
I not in favor of social or business welfare.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 9 months, 17 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#21084230 - 01/07/15 08:17 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Anyway, Fal, I wouldn't worry about tons of derivatives or debt or anything else. After all if that happens...
UNCLE SAM TO THE RESCUE!!! 
The government makes the rules. The companies play the game. It's simple. Even in the case where the companies don't play by the rules, I don't notice the government sending the executives of cheating companies into orange jump suits and sending them up to the Butt-Fuck Hostel and Resort.
So let me ask you: Say the government said that you could gamble away as much money as you wanted in Las vegas, and they would cover your loss if you didn't win. Now, I'm sure you are so morally righteous that you would sneer in indignation and refuse to take the offer.
The problem is the government. they are the ones who make the rules. it doesn't matter what the corporations do. The only solution is to fight back against the government. THEY NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND THE PEOPLE AIN'T MAKING IT.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: starfire_xes]
#21086540 - 01/08/15 10:16 AM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Star, that is true, the govt is a major problem. When you come down to it bribery is a major problem because they would be a lot more responsible if those "campaign contributions" didn't keep coming in all nice and legal.
The govt can't bail out everything and everyone even if it wants to. Our debt is unpayable now and people are starting to notice. The only thing keeping the dollar from doing a swan dive right now is that other currencies are doing just as bad or worse and don't have the big rep the dollar has.
Derivatives are like bets in a casino. Not all $600T is going to be lost at once. Its like the casino has that much going on in all their games over a period of time. Not all will be bet against the house, many bets go either way, some bet an index will go up, some bet it will go down. What makes the house nervous is when there is an imbalance. Even 1% imbalance means 6T could be owed by the house if disaster strikes. That is more than enough to bankrupt all the banks and the govt too. Who is going to loan us that kind of money? No one. What will happen if we just print it up? Don't ask. Even $1T could set off a chain reaction dominoes type effect, it does not have to be much more than that.
We are rolling them bones at the base of a volcano while ignoring the rumblings, smoke and ash
--------------------
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835)
Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US 
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21099759 - 01/11/15 01:24 AM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
So you are now supporting Government bailouts of failed private companies?
So you don't know.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389994/5-reasons-govt-might-lose-aig-lawsuit-tim-cavanaugh
Try to keep up, will ya. The government made a fortune on AIG.
Of course I know about that as I already summarized it for you:
Over time, AIG sold off it's valuable subsidiaries and was able to pay the Government back.
As I asked before:
So you are now supporting Government bailouts of failed private companies?
You seem to be very impressed with how good a job the Government did at running AIG. 
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: starfire_xes]
#21099762 - 01/11/15 01:26 AM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said:
Anyway, Fal, I wouldn't worry about tons of derivatives or debt or anything else. After all if that happens...
UNCLE SAM TO THE RESCUE!!!
My point exactly, which I'm arguing against. Zap is the one defending the Government bailouts of too big to fail companies.
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#21101544 - 01/11/15 12:11 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The government caused the failure with their regulations requiring banks to lend to bums. When the bums defaulted, as was inevitable, the industry was fucked. If you don't tell people they have to lend to scumbags you won't have to bail them out. The moral culpability lies with the government and the bums who defaulted.
In terms of the auto companies it wasn't the government that caused t\heir problems. It was the unions. The government should not have interfered with the proper procedure for a lawful bankruptcy action. You might want know, bankruptcy does not necessarily mean the end of a company. The auto company bailouts cost the taxpayers billions and were actually bailouts for greedy overpaid union jackoffs.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21104449 - 01/11/15 09:47 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The government caused the failure with their regulations requiring banks to lend to bums... If you don't tell people they have to lend to scumbags you won't have to bail them out. The moral culpability lies with the government and the bums who defaulted.
 I don't know how many times you're willing to fall on your face on that topic.
As you know, ONLY 6% of subprime loans were CRA loans. All the other subprime loans were voluntary loans by the banks who resold them as mortgage backed securities because they knew they were too risky to hang onto. The Government didn't force them to make those loans nor to resell them. If you want to blame the Government it should be for not regulating the loans.
But that's not even the worst of it. The worst of it was when Wall St started betting the loans would fail and purchased derivatives that would pay off hugely once the loans failed.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
In terms of the auto companies it wasn't the government that caused t\heir problems. It was the unions. The government should not have interfered with the proper procedure for a lawful bankruptcy action. You might want know, bankruptcy does not necessarily mean the end of a company. The auto company bailouts cost the taxpayers billions and were actually bailouts for greedy overpaid union jackoffs.
Irrelevant to the topic of derivatives. Regardless, the Government conservatively saved over 1 million US jobs by bailing out GM. It's not the Government's job to make a profit from the private sector, though you seem to think they should.
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (01/11/15 10:57 PM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#21106830 - 01/12/15 10:17 AM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The government caused the failure with their regulations requiring banks to lend to bums... If you don't tell people they have to lend to scumbags you won't have to bail them out. The moral culpability lies with the government and the bums who defaulted.
I don't know how many times you're willing to fall on your face on that topic.
As you know, ONLY 6% of subprime loans were CRA loans. All the other subprime loans were voluntary loans by the banks who resold them as mortgage backed securities because they knew they were too risky to hang onto. The Government didn't force them to make those loans nor to resell them. If you want to blame the Government it should be for not regulating the loans.
They did regulate them by encouraging them. Quote:
But that's not even the worst of it. The worst of it was when Wall St started betting the loans would fail and purchased derivatives that would pay off hugely once the loans failed.
That is what they are supposed to do. Hedge the bad investments that were forced upon them. Do you know who was the biggest buyer of that shit paper? The government.Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
In terms of the auto companies it wasn't the government that caused t\heir problems. It was the unions. The government should not have interfered with the proper procedure for a lawful bankruptcy action. You might want know, bankruptcy does not necessarily mean the end of a company. The auto company bailouts cost the taxpayers billions and were actually bailouts for greedy overpaid union jackoffs.
Irrelevant to the topic of derivatives. Regardless, the Government conservatively saved over 1 million US jobs by bailing out GM. It's not the Government's job to make a profit from the private sector, though you seem to think they should.
I think they should stay out of it. And by that I mean I don't think they should be telling banks who to lend to and I don't think they should be buying the loans.
As to the auto unin bailouts not even the idiot in chief thinks a million jobs were saved and there is no evidence that the companies would have folded under bankruptcy or that if they did the workers would not ahave just been absorbed by other companies who would ramp up production to meet the lost production at GM and Chrysler.
The auto bailouts were one thing and one thing only. A bailout for unions. The same unions that destroyed the companies in the first place.
--------------------
|
shroom_sensai
Registered: 12/13/10
Posts: 1,049
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21107554 - 01/12/15 12:48 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The governments bad m'kay...
I agree with Falcon on this one.
--------------------
My Adventures Cultivating Mescaline Bearing Cacti
“Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced.”
– Terence McKenna
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: shroom_sensai]
#21107604 - 01/12/15 12:58 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Many of us agree the govt is bad and imo, bribery is the main reason. Zap is like those guys you see on a street corner ranting about something or other.
--------------------
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835)
Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Stonehenge]
#21108481 - 01/12/15 03:45 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
There is no bribery and Fal does not agree that government is bad. He wants more more more
--------------------
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21108625 - 01/12/15 04:16 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835)
Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Stonehenge]
#21108931 - 01/12/15 05:16 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Please list the bribery convictions.
You do not get to make up your own definition of legal terms.
--------------------
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21109229 - 01/12/15 06:18 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
>Please list the bribery convictions.
Do you know how to use google? I'm not your stepen fetchit servant.
>You do not get to make up your own definition of legal terms.
Play for pay is bribery pure and simple. You are one of the few who can't seem to grasp that concept. Likewise the govt "steals" many things from us. You have said so yourself. Where are the convictions for that?
--------------------
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835)
Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21110941 - 01/12/15 11:01 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
ONLY 6% of subprime loans were CRA loans. All the other subprime loans were voluntary loans by the banks who resold them as mortgage backed securities because they knew they were too risky to hang onto. The Government didn't force them to make those loans nor to resell them. If you want to blame the Government it should be for not regulating the loans.
They did regulate them by encouraging them.
Even if we blame the Government for all CRA loan failures, that was such an insignificant fraction of the overall mortgage crisis that it wouldn't have had any impact on the economy.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
The worst of it was when Wall St started betting the loans would fail and purchased derivatives that would pay off hugely once the loans failed.
That is what they are supposed to do. Hedge the bad investments that were forced upon them.
Let them hedge the CRA loans. I don't care. The vast majority of derivatives were purchased by entities that didn't even hold an underlying security, which is why the derivatives market is so huge.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Do you know who was the biggest buyer of that shit paper? The government.
I'd really like for you to show me that the Government was purchasing derivatives. 
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#21113036 - 01/13/15 11:05 AM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The government bought the mortgages themselves. I do not give a shit about derivatives. The base investments were the problem, not any of the archana surrounding them. A simple fact is that if the assholes did not default there would be no problem and the government encouraged default by buying the loans and suing banks to lend to losers.
If the people who borrowed money did what they were supposed to do, i.e. repay their loans, there would never have been a problem at all. Derivatives, CDSs, hedges. No problem. Shitbags borrowing money they can't repay? 100% problem
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21114396 - 01/13/15 01:44 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The government bought the mortgages themselves. I do not give a shit about derivatives.
Whether you "give a shit" about the derivatives or not, THAT'S what crashed the economy, THAT'S what CRomnibus will put taxpayers on the hook for, and THAT'S what you've been defending this whole fucking thread. Do you support CRomnibus, or don't you?
By the way. the Government bought the mortgages so the banks could lend more money, not because they thought it would be profitable.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
If the people who borrowed money did what they were supposed to do, i.e. repay their loans, there would never have been a problem at all. Derivatives, CDSs, hedges. No problem. Shitbags borrowing money they can't repay? 100% problem
Banks changing their lending standards was even more of a problem. People who couldn't afford loans were talked into larger loans by banks so the banks could make a higher commission and then sell the loans to Main Street. THAT was the underlying problem.
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#21114417 - 01/13/15 01:45 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
zappa wrote
> I do not give a shit about derivatives.
This is his way of saying "you are right"
--------------------
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835)
Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 6 days
|
Re: How Many Of You Are Happy About Obama Going Around Congress? [Re: Stonehenge]
#21114593 - 01/13/15 02:02 PM (9 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
zappa wrote
> I do not give a shit about derivatives.
This is his way of saying "you are right"
No kidding. This whole discussion has been about derivatives, which he clearly didn't understand, and now he's trying to say he doesn't care? 
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale 
Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 5 all )
luvdemshrooms
Silversoul
silversoul7
Dark_Star
Jammer
Edame
Great_Satan
psilo25