|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 minutes, 55 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Ah, so they're not injecting billions into Wall St. They're passing policies that help business.
Read the links. They are not "passing policy" your beloved federal reserve is injecting billions of dollars into wall st.
I missed that part in both articles. Can you provide a quote from one of those articles that says the Fed is injecting billions into Wall St?
Quote:
Shins said: And creating the wealth disparity you complain about. talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
The wealth disparity is the result of business not passing their newly found profits down to their workers who helped earn them. And why would they? Minimum wage is way down, lowering the bar for everyone.
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Shins said: Raise interest rates and the economy will crash.
Says who?
says who? Anyone with half a brain. The economy cannot handle higher interest rates. The fed would have raised them already if it could
Sigh. Why it that conservatives only have half a brain?
The Fed raises interest rates to prevent inflation. Inflation is still at historical lows, so there is no need to raise the interest rate, though that will change soon. And when it does, the economy will not crash, unless there is some other reason.
Quote:
Shins said: why am I not suprised that the hardcore socialist falcon appears to know next to nothing about economics and the finance system.
Duuuuurrrrr tax the rich!
I have a masters degree in business, and am explaining the subject for you. You simply make claims you are unable to back up.
Taxing the rich would help reduce the income gap, and decrease the burden on the poor at the same time. Instead of making a counter point, all you can say about that is "Duuuuurrrrr".

Why do you think inflation will trend higher in the near future?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: qman]
#21827217 - 06/19/15 08:45 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: Why do you think inflation will trend higher in the near future?
An improving economy would cause inflation.
-------------------- 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.
|
|
Fal, you are just playing word games and using false numbers from your hero obumble. Unemployment is much much higher than he says and the economy is not doing well no matter what you may think.
>Taxing the rich would help reduce the income gap
So sayeth Vladimir (fal) lenin. Take from those who produce and redistribute to those who produce nothing. Your commie roots are showing again.
> It IS up under Obama.
The only thing up is the number of part time workers, a direct result of his stupid aca which thankfully will be shit canned soon. Next he is going to fuck us all over with the tpp, ttip tisa, and other alphabet horseshit he won't even let us see. It will be sprung on us like an ambush.
-------------------- “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
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 minutes, 55 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: Why do you think inflation will trend higher in the near future?
An improving economy would cause inflation.
So where is it? The latest GDP numbers hardly show a "improving economy".
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: qman]
#21827245 - 06/19/15 08:53 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: I don't view the world as R vs D, I don't really care which party appears to have the better economic track record, it's meaningless in my opinion.
Here's an old map I continue to show:
 As you can see, the states in blue have a higher median income. Those are also predominantly liberal states.
If track records don't matter to you, then keep voting for failed policies.
-------------------- 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.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 minutes, 55 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: I don't view the world as R vs D, I don't really care which party appears to have the better economic track record, it's meaningless in my opinion.
Here's an old map I continue to show:
 As you can see, the states in blue have a higher median income. Those are also predominantly liberal states.
If track records don't matter to you, then keep voting for failed policies. 
So all states are equal in nature and the only determining factor is whether a R or D is in office? 
Can your view of the world become anymore simplistic?
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: qman]
#21827272 - 06/19/15 09:03 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
There is plenty of inflation already, mostly in the stock / real estate markets.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: Shins]
#21827275 - 06/19/15 09:06 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: There is plenty of inflation already, mostly in the stock / real estate markets.
But the labor and commodity markets show nothing but weakness.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: Shins]
#21827304 - 06/19/15 09:15 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Heres the part falcon ignored;
"Quantitative easing (QE) is a type of monetary policy used by central banks to stimulate the economy when standard monetary policy has become ineffective.[1][2][3] A central bank implements quantitative easing by buying specified amounts of financial assets from commercial banks and other private institutions, thus raising the prices of those financial assets"
"A central bank enacts quantitative easing by purchasing—without reference to the interest rate—a set quantity of bonds or other financial assets on financial markets from private financial institutions."
"Capital flightEdit The new money could be used by the banks to invest in emerging markets, commodity-based economies, commodities themselves, and non-local opportunities rather than to lend to local businesses that are having difficulty getting loans." <- what is happening.
" Increased income and wealth inequalityEdit See also: Economic inequality According to CNBC's Robert Frank, a Bank of England report shows that its quantitative easing policies had benefited mainly the wealthy, and that 40% of those gains went to the richest 5% of British households.[96][97] Dhaval Joshi of BCA Research wrote that "QE cash ends up overwhelmingly in profits, thereby exacerbating already extreme income inequality and the consequent social tensions that arise from it".[97] Anthony Randazzo of the Reason Foundation wrote that QE "is fundamentally a regressive redistribution program that has been boosting wealth for those already engaged in the financial sector or those who already own homes, but passing little along to the rest of the economy. It is a primary driver of income inequality".
"In May 2013, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Richard Fisher said that cheap money has made rich people richer, but has not done quite as much for working Americans."
These socialists like falcon who support the federal reserve are the real ones resoonsible for income inequality. Allthewhile they go around championing the cause AGAINST income inequality. How can they have such conflicting positions? One must assume they are either stupid and blind or lying and malevolent.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: Stonehenge]
#21830065 - 06/19/15 09:04 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: Fal, you are just playing word games and using false numbers from your hero obumble. Unemployment is much much higher than he says and the economy is not doing well no matter what you may think.
Nobody said the economy is doing well. But it is FAR better than when Bush was in office in 2008.
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Taxing the rich would help reduce the income gap
So sayeth Vladimir (fal) lenin. Take from those who produce and redistribute to those who produce nothing. Your commie roots are showing again.
Bullshit, that's dumb. Don't give to those that produce nothing. Give to those that work full time and are still living in poverty.
-------------------- 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: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: qman]
#21830122 - 06/19/15 09:18 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: I don't view the world as R vs D, I don't really care which party appears to have the better economic track record, it's meaningless in my opinion.
Here's an old map I continue to show:
 As you can see, the states in blue have a higher median income. Those are also predominantly liberal states.
If track records don't matter to you, then keep voting for failed policies. 
So all states are equal in nature and the only determining factor is whether a R or D is in office? 
Can your view of the world become anymore simplistic? 
Simplistic? We can observe that Democratic presidents do better than republican presidents and Democratic states do better than republican states. That's about as simplistic as saying we can observe that people who smoke more are more likely to get lung cancer. Perhaps there's more to it, but if so, you'll need to explain what other factors contribute to Democratic success.
-------------------- 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: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: Shins]
#21830172 - 06/19/15 09:28 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Heres the part falcon ignored;
"Quantitative easing (QE) is a type of monetary policy used by central banks to stimulate the economy when standard monetary policy has become ineffective. A central bank implements quantitative easing by buying specified amounts of financial assets from commercial banks and other private institutions, thus raising the prices of those financial assets"
"A central bank enacts quantitative easing by purchasing—without reference to the interest rate—a set quantity of bonds or other financial assets on financial markets from private financial institutions."
"Capital flightEdit The new money could be used by the banks to invest in emerging markets, commodity-based economies, commodities themselves, and non-local opportunities rather than to lend to local businesses that are having difficulty getting loans." <- what is happening.
I didn't ignore it. I agree with that completely. Now, where does it say the Fed invested billions on Wall St? Did you perhaps mean to say that the Feds loaned billions to banks?
Quote:
Shins said: According to CNBC's Robert Frank, a Bank of England report shows that its quantitative easing policies had benefited mainly the wealthy, and that 40% of those gains went to the richest 5% of British households.[96][97] Dhaval Joshi of BCA Research wrote that "QE cash ends up overwhelmingly in profits, thereby exacerbating already extreme income inequality and the consequent social tensions that arise from it".[97] Anthony Randazzo of the Reason Foundation wrote that QE "is fundamentally a regressive redistribution program that has been boosting wealth for those already engaged in the financial sector or those who already own homes, but passing little along to the rest of the economy. It is a primary driver of income inequality".
It has given lots of money to the wealthy, that's true. But it hasn't prevented them from passing it on to the people that helped them earn it. That problem must be solved by Congress.
Quote:
Shins said: These socialists like falcon who support the federal reserve are the real ones resoonsible for income inequality. Allthewhile they go around championing the cause AGAINST income inequality. How can they have such conflicting positions? One must assume they are either stupid and blind or lying and malevolent.
None of the above. The Fed has helped the ecomomy grow. It's not the Fed's job to ensure that businesses are fair about passing the money down to the people that helped them earn it. Congress has to step in and do things like pass minimum wage laws, increase taxes on the rich, and such, to help ensure everyone benefits from business' newfound success.
-------------------- 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.
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: I don't view the world as R vs D, I don't really care which party appears to have the better economic track record, it's meaningless in my opinion.
Here's an old map I continue to show:
 As you can see, the states in blue have a higher median income. Those are also predominantly liberal states.
If track records don't matter to you, then keep voting for failed policies. 
So all states are equal in nature and the only determining factor is whether a R or D is in office? 
Can your view of the world become anymore simplistic? 
http://www.ibtimes.com/fools-gold-california-has-highest-poverty-rate-united-states-1548707
You need to normalize income across the states to compare them, when you do, California sucks donkey balls. So does New York. Illinois.
Hey, that's the liberal big 3. Packed with rich elitists and high levels of poverty.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21831148 - 06/20/15 02:44 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: You need to normalize income across the states to compare them, when you do, California sucks donkey balls. So does New York. Illinois.
Hey, that's the liberal big 3. Packed with rich elitists and high levels of poverty.
You don't "need" to normalize it, though I get the argument. People living in California make twice as much, on average, as people living in Mississippi. That means they can afford to buy a home worth twice as much and sell it for twice as much when they retire, leaving them twice as much money for their retirement.
Sure they might not be able to live in as nice a home as the person in Mississippi, because Mississippi is so cheap, but they'll have more money left when they retire.
-------------------- 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.
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
starfire_xes said: You need to normalize income across the states to compare them, when you do, California sucks donkey balls. So does New York. Illinois.
Hey, that's the liberal big 3. Packed with rich elitists and high levels of poverty.
You don't "need" to normalize it, though I get the argument. People living in California make twice as much, on average, as people living in Mississippi. That means they can afford to buy a home worth twice as much and sell it for twice as much when they retire, leaving them twice as much money for their retirement.
Sure they might not be able to live in as nice a home as the person in Mississippi, because Mississippi is so cheap, but they'll have more money left when they retire.
Isn't the vote going to the Senate next week for the TPA alone and if it gets 60 votes, it passes?
As for CA and what a house is "worth", the drought is going to reset that real estate bubble, and in a big way. Somehow the techno illogical there just don't get it, and still think there is a solution to no water, other than trucking it in.
Water is the next oil.
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: LunarEclipse]
#21831797 - 06/20/15 09:35 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LunarEclipse said: As for CA and what a house is "worth", the drought is going to reset that real estate bubble, and in a big way. Somehow the techno illogical there just don't get it, and still think there is a solution to no water, other than trucking it in.
Water is the next oil.
No is going to go thirsty, and many people are converting their lawns to other types of landscaping. I just stared a project to replace my backyard lawn with a concrete patio. That backyard patio is an expensive project, and I suspect the value of my property will only go up as a result, because it will accommodate large backyard gatherings (I host a lot of large wine tasting events).
-------------------- 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.
|
|
Fal, you regurgitate your left wing beliefs like reciting a catechism but that does not make them true.
>Nobody said the economy is doing well. But it is FAR better than when Bush was in office in 2008
False. The economy was cooking then, you do recall that there was a bubble that popped and the bottom dropped out in '09 don't you? The average of the economy was much better in 08 than now. You need to be a little skeptical when the cheerleader media tells you stories.
> Don't give to those that produce nothing. Give to those that work full time and are still living in poverty.
But your favored system of welfare gives to those who produce nothing and you want to keep the whole system but only change taxes on the rich to make them higher. Therefore, like I said, you want to take from those who produce and give to those who don't or who produce little. If obumble doesn't have a place for you in his administration, perhaps putin does?
>We can observe that Democratic presidents do better than republican presidents and Democratic states do better than republican states.
We observe nothing of the sort.
>The Fed has helped the ecomomy grow.
It has done nothing of the sort. Between the fed and your hero obumble, they have given the bulk of the stimulus to the rich and little to none has trickled down.
>Congress has to step in and do things like pass minimum wage laws, increase taxes on the rich, and such, to help ensure everyone benefits from business' newfound success.
Putin, lenin, castro, mao, all agree wholeheartedly. Meanwhile, business seeing that they will be sacrificed to help the socialists/ commies flees to other countries to survive leaving a service based economy. You commies then want to jack wages way up but then whine and cry when prices go up and demand more taxes leading to more business closing. We are in a downward spiral exactly because of policies like the ones you naively support.
-------------------- “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
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
LunarEclipse said: As for CA and what a house is "worth", the drought is going to reset that real estate bubble, and in a big way. Somehow the techno illogical there just don't get it, and still think there is a solution to no water, other than trucking it in.
Water is the next oil.
No is going to go thirsty, and many people are converting their lawns to other types of landscaping. I just stared a project to replace my backyard lawn with a concrete patio. That backyard patio is an expensive project, and I suspect the value of my property will only go up as a result, because it will accommodate large backyard gatherings (I host a lot of large wine tasting events).
Just last week CA cut off senior water rights going back to 1903 in the hardest hit areas. The town of Mountain House is at risk for losing it's water supply completely as a result.
Converting your yard to concrete is a relative drop in the bucket when it comes to water use. Fracking, for example, is allowed to continue. No ban on that but it not only uses massive amounts of water, but contaminates the very aquifers that people will be relying on more as the snow pack doesn't come back enough even in a good year to make a difference.
Seriously, the canals from the delta is the best solution Jerry Brown can come up with even after 30+ years of trying, when the delta is fighting salinity as it is with levees that aren't in the greatest of shape?
Those reservoirs aren't filling back up even if everybody concretes their entire properties.
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: LunarEclipse]
#21832702 - 06/20/15 03:00 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LunarEclipse said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
LunarEclipse said: As for CA and what a house is "worth", the drought is going to reset that real estate bubble, and in a big way. Somehow the techno illogical there just don't get it, and still think there is a solution to no water, other than trucking it in.
Water is the next oil.
No is going to go thirsty, and many people are converting their lawns to other types of landscaping. I just stared a project to replace my backyard lawn with a concrete patio. That backyard patio is an expensive project, and I suspect the value of my property will only go up as a result, because it will accommodate large backyard gatherings (I host a lot of large wine tasting events).
Just last week CA cut off senior water rights going back to 1903 in the hardest hit areas. The town of Mountain House is at risk for losing it's water supply completely as a result.
Converting your yard to concrete is a relative drop in the bucket when it comes to water use. Fracking, for example, is allowed to continue. No ban on that but it not only uses massive amounts of water, but contaminates the very aquifers that people will be relying on more as the snow pack doesn't come back enough even in a good year to make a difference.
Seriously, the canals from the delta is the best solution Jerry Brown can come up with even after 30+ years of trying, when the delta is fighting salinity as it is with levees that aren't in the greatest of shape?
Those reservoirs aren't filling back up even if everybody concretes their entire properties.
yes they will. there was a drought in texas several years ago, now that state is floating away. the problem in california is 1) the government 2) to many people
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Obama gets the TPP shoved up his ass... [Re: Stonehenge]
#21835005 - 06/21/15 12:51 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Nobody said the economy is doing well. But it is FAR better than when Bush was in office in 2008
Fal, you regurgitate your left wing beliefs like reciting a catechism but that does not make them true.
The economy was cooking then, you do recall that there was a bubble that popped and the bottom dropped out in '09 don't you? The average of the economy was much better in 08 than now. You need to be a little skeptical when the cheerleader media tells you stories.
The bubble popped in 08 under Bush. Here's the evidence:
 I always back up my claims, but you can't back yours up, because there is no evidence showing the economy didn't tank in 2008.
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Don't give to those that produce nothing. Give to those that work full time and are still living in poverty.
But your favored system of welfare gives to those who produce nothing and you want to keep the whole system but only change taxes on the rich to make them higher.
No, that's a straw man. I just told you "Don't give to those that produce nothing". Can you read?
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: We can observe that Democratic presidents do better than republican presidents and Democratic states do better than republican states.
We observe nothing of the sort.
I just provided you the evidence in two different graphs (one of income by state, the other of market performance by president). You've got nothing more than a statement based on ignorance.
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: The Fed has helped the ecomomy grow.
It has done nothing of the sort. Between the fed and your hero obumble, they have given the bulk of the stimulus to the rich and little to none has trickled down.
The money went to business. If they didn't share it with the people that helped earn it, that's the fault of Congress for not doing anything to get it there.
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Congress has to step in and do things like pass minimum wage laws, increase taxes on the rich, and such, to help ensure everyone benefits from business' newfound success.
You commies want to jack wages way up but then whine and cry when prices go up
No, I don't whine and cry. I'm happy when people have more money.
-------------------- 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.
|
|