San Francisco's Chinese Bridge

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx

From productive work that could be performed in the private or public sector, profit or non-profit, duh. But you seem to narrowly define wealth as money in a person's back account regardless of have they acquired it anywhere in the world.

So then you are just fine with a 100% tax on your income?

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: Al

Originally Posted By: Tempest

Bernanke just came out and said the economy is in bad shape and he doesn't understand why. He believes as you do.

Not surprising considering he doesn't seem to realize that Stmulus money is Taxpayer's Money being spent.

Originally Posted By: buster

You two continue to misconstrue monetarism, fiscal stimulus, austrian, keyensian, post-keynesian economics.

 

[buster]

Tempest, the probably is easily understood. It's people like yourself that are living in la la land. It's a process and over time things change. What we are in now, is a result of poor regulation. This WAS all Wall Streets fault. Even if economists in general felt the act of securitizing loans(which are assets not liabilities) was a good thing, neither they nor regulators can force the banks to do anything when it comes to their portfolio decisions unless it has to do with compliance of laws. And anyway, the act of securitizing on its own is not a bad thing, its when you couple it with fraudulent loans that makes it a bad thing. Its the bubble created by these pathetic maggots that made securitization a bad thing. You also can't blame citizens for accepting loans that were offered to them, when they themselves felt prices would keep going up. Who made the loans? Who made the CDOs? Who made credit default swaps? Who legitimized them? lack of regulation was the problem, not the other way around

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: buster

You two continue to misconstrue monetarism, fiscal stimulus, austrian, keyensian, post-keynesian economics.

Are government and private funds perfectly fungable in economic outcomes?

Quote:

neither they nor regulators can force the banks to do anything when it comes to their portfolio decisions unless it has to do with compliance of laws.

Were banks forced to take money they didn't want? Did the government threaten prosecution of banks if they didn't make enough low income loans? Were the banks threatened with law suits due to supposedly "redlining"? Did FM & FM increase their quota of low quality loans? Where are all of the investigations of these evil bankers and FM & FM? Why was FM & FM not "reformed" along with the "evil" private banks? Plus, the government freely admits that it forced bad loans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFlYmLAMbrw

 

[buster]

Al and Tempest, you've both been fooled. You've bought into the idea that privatizing and allowing corporations and banks to stranglehold government works. We are living it. Some worthwhile ideas: Leave inflation/employment targeting alone and leave the interest rates fixed at or near zero and focus all their energy on bank regulation. Who gets bailed out, and what sort of assets they buy should be the decision of congress, not some unaccountable unelected group.

 

[buster]

 

[buster]

Quote:

“Private market discipline” becomes perverse under accounting control fraud. Capital is allocated in abundance, at progressively lower spreads (despite massively increased risk), to fraudulent firms and professionals. In this form of Gresham’s dynamic, bad ethics drives good ethics out of the marketplace. Note that once, for example, a significant number of appraisers are suborned by the fraudulent lenders to inflate appraised value it is more likely that such appraisers will go on to commit other frauds during their career. If cheaters prosper, then honest businesses are placed at a crippling competitive disadvantage. Effective regulation and prosecution is essential to make it possible for honest firms to compete.

Quote:

The anti-regulators got their wish – they took the regulatory cops off the beat. The banking regulatory agencies ceased making criminal referrals, the SEC ceased bringing even their wimpy consent actions against the massive accounting control frauds, and the Justice Department ceased prosecuting the accounting control frauds during the run up to the crisis. The results were multiple echo epidemics of fraud, a hyper-inflated bubble, and the Great Recession. If Baker and Moore think these fraudulent CEOs constitute the “productive class” – then capitalism was killed by the producers. The financial frauds, however, were not productive. They were weapons of mass financial destruction. Their fraudulent CEOs were motivated by the most banal of motivations that every major religion warns against – unlimited greed, ego, and a radical lack of empathy for their victims. The most pathetic figures in the crisis, however, are not the CEOs but their shills. Why aren’t the honest bankers leading the charge to prosecute their fraudulent rivals?

Why aren't the honest bankers demanding prosectuions of their dishonest rivals?

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: buster

What we are in now, is a result of poor regulation. This WAS all Wall Streets fault. Its when you couple it with fraudulent loans that makes it a bad thing. Its the bubble created by these pathetic maggots that made securitization a bad thing. You also can't blame citizens for accepting loans that were offered to them, lack of regulation was the problem, not the other way around

I got it..more Gov Regulation and more Government. Its Wall Street's Fault. The idiots that couldn't afford their loans are blameless. And Government Regulations work so well: Remember Harry Markopolis??? I am sure you would rather forget. He tried to alert the SEC (Government Agency) for over 7 years (in numerious reports) that Madoff for over 7 years was running a Ponzi Scheme in violation of their Regulations. Fortunately this Competent Government agency took quick action and saved 10's of thousands of people from losing 65 Billion $$$$.. Oh wait. the SEC took no action. Until the whole thing exploded on its own Probably more Government agencies and more regulations will prevent this from happening again.

 

[buster]

Al, all the evidence is just not on your side. The Fed chief among most economists all agree that poor regulation was a major problem. You can read many good articles, some of which I posted that confirm this. F&F did not cause this either. They were a consequence of it. Anyway, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Regulations and the monetary system are complex topics. That is why I don't call a spade a spade at times. It's just not that easy. These are the signs that should be at Wall St.:

Quote:

Wall St is the Problem…..MMT is the Answer! The only thing the Banksters want more than bailouts is a return to gold! MMT–For You and Me! Render Unto Banksters Nothing! Chairman Bernanke–Regulate Your [censored] Banks! Procyclical monetary and fiscal policies in a Depression are stupid! MMT- The Revolution is Here! No More Bailouts–Let Banksters Eat Losses! Paychecks for the People! A keystroke is a terrible thing to waste! Render Not Unto Banksters! The Financial Sector is a Lot More Trouble Than it’s Worth! Chase Makes Waste! Dodd and Frank Don’t Know Beans About Regulation! The Enemy of My Bank Is My Friend! All We Owe China is a Bank Statement–Get Over It! Democratize the Banks! Banks for the 99%! Banks for People not for Banksters! Banks for Democracy, not Plutocracy! Honest Community Banks, Not fraudster Big Banks! End Welfare for the Rich! Keystroke Government Money, don’t borrow it! Keystrokes for Jobs! Send Timmy Home! New Suggestions: “Currency for a common good” “Paychecks not credit card bills” “Stimulus not corporate welfare” “End debt slavery” “Debt forgiveness, not debt peonage” “Money is a commons”

Link

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: Al

If the company doesn't outsource it may become unprofitable and go out of businesws = no american jobs, no taxes, more people out of work and then all of the product that the American company made will come from overseas.

That statement is complete malarkey. The ONLY reason companies outsource is because of greed. All business owners and CEOs care about are THEIR salaries; why should they have to suffer making only $10 million a year by paying their employees a decent income and making quality products, when they can earn $100 million a year by outsourcing and making junk? I also think the word censoring in this forum is a bit overboard...