|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 hours, 13 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
qman said: All sort of jobs were eliminated during that recession, construction jobs included.
The bankers created a credit crash and then got bailed out as a result, I was against that policy. Obama and many other "anti-business" liberals fully endorsed the rewarding of unethical and illegal behavior, including our own Falcon.
You know damn good and well that Falcon doesn't endorse it. You're forgetting one major caveat to Falcon's stance on the subject. Yes, we should have bailed them out, to prevent further damage to the people in this country who didn't do anything wrong. However, we should have broken them up, and put back the old regulations that kept banks in check.
Stop playing stupid... or are you not playing?
So you supported the bailouts as well, why am I not surprised. Now you're complaining the banks are still "too big too fail". 
"prevent further damage to the people in this country who didn't do anything wrong"
You mean getting evicted from their homes as the banks got 100 cents on the dollar for their mortgage bonds?
Do you even understand what took place? Joe Six-Pack got screwed as the rich got even rich thanks to the bailouts.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,347
Last seen: 6 hours, 2 minutes
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 1
#23923522 - 12/13/16 05:57 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: Hmm, I didn't endorse the bailouts, Fal did.
I believe in insolvency, bankruptcy and defaults, he doesn't.
Well, you've quite clearly endorsed the brand of politics embraced by big banks and big business as being the only rational brand of politics. They all supported the bailouts. Therefore, you can't blame anyone for assuming you agree with them. After all, any political ideas that aren't embraced by the powerful institutions of our society, aren't embraced because they aren't practicable.
Quote:
qman said: Recessions happen even during eras of economic expansion, so yes they must be included in the economics cycles, thinking otherwise is delusional. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States
Do you understand credit cycles? That's why we have booms and busts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_cycle
I will repeat myself:
Quote:
I don't consider a Great Recession, or a Great Depression 'part of the business cycle'. This recession was due to outright illegal behavior on behalf of the banks, along with deregulation.
I do believe that the 'Great Recession' was a bit different than previous recessions. It is even possible that the dollar will never fully recover from this one.
Quote:
The recession was the result of too much credit getting extended to unqualified borrowers, when you're "too big too fail", you tend to engage in irresponsible fiscal behavior.
Yes, and the banks went to all sorts of tricks to do this. They should never have been allowed to grow so large, but since we permitted them to do so, hey should have been bailed out and broken up. We should have the foresight to prevent such things. You believe that average American citizens should pay for the corruption of big banks, Falcon and I disagree. You believe that we should not regulate banks to prevent these things from happening, but instead allow them to crash the economy, and not bail them out to prevent economic collapse, Fal and I disagree.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 1
#23923669 - 12/13/16 06:12 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: Do you even understand what took place? Joe Six-Pack got screwed as the rich got even rich thanks to the bailouts.
yeah...and?
cause and effect. Joe Six Pack was bound to get screwed either way.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 hours, 13 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
qman said: Hmm, I didn't endorse the bailouts, Fal did.
I believe in insolvency, bankruptcy and defaults, he doesn't.
Well, you've quite clearly endorsed the brand of politics embraced by big banks and big business as being the only rational brand of politics. They all supported the bailouts. Therefore, you can't blame anyone for assuming you agree with them. After all, any political ideas that aren't embraced by the powerful institutions of our society, aren't embraced because they aren't practicable.
Quote:
qman said: Recessions happen even during eras of economic expansion, so yes they must be included in the economics cycles, thinking otherwise is delusional. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States
Do you understand credit cycles? That's why we have booms and busts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_cycle
I will repeat myself:
Quote:
I don't consider a Great Recession, or a Great Depression 'part of the business cycle'. This recession was due to outright illegal behavior on behalf of the banks, along with deregulation.
I do believe that the 'Great Recession' was a bit different than previous recessions. It is even possible that the dollar will never fully recover from this one.
Quote:
The recession was the result of too much credit getting extended to unqualified borrowers, when you're "too big too fail", you tend to engage in irresponsible fiscal behavior.
Yes, and the banks went to all sorts of tricks to do this. They should never have been allowed to grow so large, but since we permitted them to do so, hey should have been bailed out and broken up. We should have the foresight to prevent such things. You believe that average American citizens should pay for the corruption of big banks, Falcon and I disagree. You believe that we should not regulate banks to prevent these things from happening, but instead allow them to crash the economy, and not bail them out to prevent economic collapse, Fal and I disagree.
"You believe that average American citizens should pay for the corruption of big banks"
No, I believe equity and bond holders should pay for the corruption of big banks, not US citizens.
"You believe that we should not regulate banks to prevent these things from happening"
Nonsense, Clinton should have never pushed for this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_legislation
But guess what? Do you know what cures shitty behavior, take away the safety nets for the crooks. Why didn't the smaller banks take the big risk the big banks did? Because they already knew they weren't going to get bailed out.
"crash the economy"
No, capitalism can work through insolvencies, bankruptcies, defaults, and assets getting bought at a cheap price to reward the one's that didn't engage in that behavior.
Here we are 8 years later and the same issues and risks still exist, nothing has been fixed.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 hours, 13 minutes
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said:
Quote:
qman said: Do you even understand what took place? Joe Six-Pack got screwed as the rich got even rich thanks to the bailouts.
yeah...and?
cause and effect. Joe Six Pack was bound to get screwed either way.
Yeah, but the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 2
#23923811 - 12/13/16 06:52 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Your evidence said higher minimum wage laws fail in countries that don't enforce them
Like when illegals work under the US minimum wage laws? How has that been working out for US wages?
I haven't seen any empirical evidence showing illegal immigration hurts wages. In fact, I've repeatedly shown there is no correlation between unemployment and wages, showing supply and demand for labor has little to do with wage levels. But you insist we blame illegals anyway.
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Do companies from those countries have the same profit margins as US companies where there is more than enough to go around?
Because ALL US workers are employed at a large company with current high profit margins? https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-04-20/big-companies-still-employ-lots-of-people
"S&P 500 employment...17.3 percent in 2015" You do realize medium and smaller business do NOT have those same margins? The higher margins are also the result from outsourcing to cheap labor economies.
BTW, your theory has been that mandated higher wages will create more demand, so profit margins should be immaterial to your economic thesis.
Good point. Minimum wage increases appear to work even though not all companies have giant profit margins. Thanks for pointing that out!
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: ...minimum wage increase has no LONG TERM impact on employment
You do realize that hiking the minimum wage but not keeping it up with inflation really isn't a wage hike? What today's minimum wage in real terms? http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/21/adjusted-for-inflation-the-federal-minimum-wage-is-worth-less-than-50-years-ago.html
"Data show that in 1968, the federal minimum wage was equivalent to $10.90 in 2015 dollars, nearly $4 higher than today's rate"
Yes, I do realize that. Is your argument that we should tie minimum wage to at least the 1968 rate? I like that idea!
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: The empirical evidence shows no increase in unemployment in Germany as a result of a minimum wage.
It's a little too early to really see how their minimum wage hike will workout.
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Employment_statistics
"part-time increased steadily from 16.5% on 2005 to 19.0% in 2015. By far the largest proportion of part-time workers in 2015 was found in the Netherlands (46.9%) followed by Austria, Germany..."
So my 2016 data is "too early" to see the effects of a Jan 15 minimum wage on unemployment, but your 2015 data is just fine? Alrighty then.
Quote:
qman said: The bankers created a credit crash and then got bailed out as a result, I was against that policy. Obama and many other "anti-business" liberals fully endorsed the rewarding of unethical and illegal behavior, including our own Falcon.
What woof said: Bigbadwooof said: You know damn good and well that Falcon doesn't endorse it. You're forgetting one major caveat to Falcon's stance on the subject. Yes, we should have bailed them out, to prevent further damage to the people in this country who didn't do anything wrong. However, we should have broken them up, and put back the old regulations that kept banks in check.
Stop playing stupid... or are you not playing?
Quote:
qman said: I believe in insolvency, bankruptcy and defaults, Fal doesn't. . . . So you supported the bailouts as well, why am I not surprised. Now you're complaining the banks are still "too big too fail". 
Wooof, I don't think qman is playing...
-------------------- 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.
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 1
#23923843 - 12/13/16 07:00 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
akira_akuma said:
Quote:
qman said: Do you even understand what took place? Joe Six-Pack got screwed as the rich got even rich thanks to the bailouts.
yeah...and?
cause and effect. Joe Six Pack was bound to get screwed either way.
Yeah, but the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
they aren't set to be able to receive one.
but they are set to suffer if the system that they rely on (or are made to rely on) crashes.
why do you think i don't participate. because it's a farce, and a gyp.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 1
#23923894 - 12/13/16 07:14 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
The top percentile lost more money as a percentage than anyone, actually.
And Joe six pack avoided a Great Depression.
Again, I believe Government needs to break up too big to fail so we never need another bailout.
-------------------- 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 hours, 13 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
The top percentile lost more money as a percentage than anyone, actually.
And Joe six pack avoided a Great Depression.
Again, I believe Government needs to break up too big to fail so we never need another bailout.
The loss was very temporary, the end result was even more wealth inequality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
"Joe six pack avoided a Great Depression"
That's speculation on your part and nothing more, either way 8 years later and he's worse off as the rich got even richer.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,369
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 3 hours, 39 minutes
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman]
#23924075 - 12/13/16 07:58 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
How is it speculation and nothing more?
Because it doesnt fit your narrative? At the very very very least, theres an argument (based on evidence) to be made that bailing out the banks saved what little was left of our house of cards economy.
--------------------
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,347
Last seen: 6 hours, 2 minutes
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 1
#23924303 - 12/13/16 09:13 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: "You believe that average American citizens should pay for the corruption of big banks"
No, I believe equity and bond holders should pay for the corruption of big banks, not US citizens.
"You believe that we should not regulate banks to prevent these things from happening"
Nonsense, Clinton should have never pushed for this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_legislation
But guess what? Do you know what cures shitty behavior, take away the safety nets for the crooks. Why didn't the smaller banks take the big risk the big banks did? Because they already knew they weren't going to get bailed out.
I feel like you're utterly misrepresenting my position. The banks should never have been allowed to be in a position where their failure would collapse the economy, but they were. In that situation, they should be bailed out by the government that erroneously allowed them to grow beyond reason. In reflection of our mistake, the government should have broken them up, and not permitted them to ever grow to the point of 'too big to fail' again. Does that not sound reasonable?
We shouldn't let the economy fail, and punish the entire country, along with the banks, because a bunch of greedy assholes in boardrooms fucked shit up for everyone.
Quote:
"crash the economy"
No, capitalism can work through insolvencies, bankruptcies, defaults, and assets getting bought at a cheap price to reward the one's that didn't engage in that behavior.
So, you don't believe the economy would have collapsed into depression, had we not bailed out the banks?
Quote:
Here we are 8 years later and the same issues and risks still exist, nothing has been fixed.
The Obama administration never broke up the banks. They are cunts. Agreed.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,347
Last seen: 6 hours, 2 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
The top percentile lost more money as a percentage than anyone, actually.
And Joe six pack avoided a Great Depression.
Again, I believe Government needs to break up too big to fail so we never need another bailout.
I believe in the end they reaped immense benefit from the recession, if I am not mistaken.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
let's go back to the gold standard, and duel it out with shovels.
no more government backed currency!
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 hours, 13 minutes
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said: How is it speculation and nothing more?
Because it doesnt fit your narrative? At the very very very least, theres an argument (based on evidence) to be made that bailing out the banks saved what little was left of our house of cards economy.
"How is it speculation?"
Because nobody would know what would happen if the bailouts didn't occur, but capitalism always had the mechanisms and laws to redistribute the assets, the crony capitalists never wanted that outcome.
"Because it doesn't fit your narrative?"
If my narrative is to not reward unethical business behavior, then the answer would be yes.
"bailing out the banks saved what little was left of our house of cars economy"
How so? You do realize bankruptcy and bond defaults are a natural part of capitalism? It doesn't mean it's the end of the world by any means.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 8 hours, 13 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
qman said: "You believe that average American citizens should pay for the corruption of big banks"
No, I believe equity and bond holders should pay for the corruption of big banks, not US citizens.
"You believe that we should not regulate banks to prevent these things from happening"
Nonsense, Clinton should have never pushed for this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_legislation
But guess what? Do you know what cures shitty behavior, take away the safety nets for the crooks. Why didn't the smaller banks take the big risk the big banks did? Because they already knew they weren't going to get bailed out.
I feel like you're utterly misrepresenting my position. The banks should never have been allowed to be in a position where their failure would collapse the economy, but they were. In that situation, they should be bailed out by the government that erroneously allowed them to grow beyond reason. In reflection of our mistake, the government should have broken them up, and not permitted them to ever grow to the point of 'too big to fail' again. Does that not sound reasonable?
We shouldn't let the economy fail, and punish the entire country, along with the banks, because a bunch of greedy assholes in boardrooms fucked shit up for everyone.
Quote:
"crash the economy"
No, capitalism can work through insolvencies, bankruptcies, defaults, and assets getting bought at a cheap price to reward the one's that didn't engage in that behavior.
So, you don't believe the economy would have collapsed into depression, had we not bailed out the banks?
Quote:
Here we are 8 years later and the same issues and risks still exist, nothing has been fixed.
The Obama administration never broke up the banks. They are cunts. Agreed.
"Does that not sound reasonable?"
It does, but my solution would have guaranteed the big banks were busted up, today we are left with the same issues and centralized source of power- the big banks.
I think if capitalism was given a chance to work, the risks of a long depression would have been low. The best part would have been the new system after the death of the old system.
There were regional bank failures in the early 1990's, the bank that held my father's real estate firm mortgage debt went under and the debt was bought by another bank on the cheap, as a result they were able to reduce my father's mortgage debt in half while still making a great profit.
This is capitalism, the same could have been done for Joe Six-Pack and his mortgage debt, did anyone renegotiate his terms? No, he got nothing but an eviction notice.
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,876
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman] 2
#23924419 - 12/13/16 09:51 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
akira_akuma said:
Quote:
qman said: Do you even understand what took place? Joe Six-Pack got screwed as the rich got even rich thanks to the bailouts.
yeah...and?
cause and effect. Joe Six Pack was bound to get screwed either way.
Yeah, but the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
This an oft overlooked point. Why bail out the banks when we could have bailed out the homeowners? The borrowers could have paid off the banks, and kept their homes. Instead, we bailed out the banks, they foreclosed on the homes and used the bailout money for executive bonuses.
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,876
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said: and a gyp.
THATS RACIST!
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,876
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said: let's go back to the gold standard, and duel it out with shovels.
no more government backed currency!
you only say that because Canada is still full of gold
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,347
Last seen: 6 hours, 2 minutes
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: ballsalsa]
#23924455 - 12/13/16 10:01 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said:
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
akira_akuma said:
Quote:
qman said: Do you even understand what took place? Joe Six-Pack got screwed as the rich got even rich thanks to the bailouts.
yeah...and?
cause and effect. Joe Six Pack was bound to get screwed either way.
Yeah, but the elites never felt any pain. They want capitalism for everybody but themselves, then it's "we need a bailout. Where was Joe Six-Pack's bailout?
This an oft overlooked point. Why bail out the banks when we could have bailed out the homeowners? The borrowers could have paid off the banks, and kept their homes. Instead, we bailed out the banks, they foreclosed on the homes and used the bailout money for executive bonuses.
Yes. Although, the banks had to pay the money back. However, I think you could have had homeowners pay the money back. The economy would be thriving. After the Great Depression, we bailed out the people with the New Deal. That's the approach we probably should have taken here.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Socialism vs democracy [Re: qman]
#23924458 - 12/13/16 10:02 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
wasn't that because so many people were sold sub-prime mortgages?
Quote:
ballsalsa said:
Quote:
akira_akuma said: and a gyp.
THATS RACIST!

|
|