or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Unpleasant Truths: Reagan was for the Buffet Rule
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Unpleasant Truths: Reagan was for the Buffet Rule - Page 4  

post #121 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

You have no way to know this was way beyond a market correction" that is pure subjective conjecture. Period. You have no idea what amount of market correction was needed. You also say that like it is actually a valid counter-argument. You also keep repeating the same statements about the entire system coming down without providing any real evidence other than repeating what was claimed at that time.

 

 

Do we get to call you a "Romeny-ite"? lol.gif

 

Anyway "It's a far less percentage of GDP that it has been in the past" is a bullshit statement and I think you probably know why. I think you're trying to be clever here, but we'll see.

 

My claim of "way beyond a correction" is/was supported by: 

 

  • The POTUS
  • Congress
  • Fed Chairman and Board
  • The Secretary of the Treasury
  • Investment bank CEO's and their boards
  • Private corporations reporting trouble accessing credit
  • Individual consumers reporting trouble getting house and car loans

 

And somehow I'm the one engaging in conjecture?  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

 

 

You don't grasp the full extent to which our foreign policy affects everything else. The military industrial complex is pervasive and integrated into just about every aspect of our economy. "Military spending" is only a fraction of the money and resources we pour into maintaining our overseas empire and ever increasing "security measures" at home. Do the "military spending" figures include contracts granted to 3rd party and private firms? "Defense" spending?

 

The "unintended" consequences of our foreign policy are being used as justification to trample on civil liberties at home with ever-growing authoritarian bureaucracies such as the TSA. Money is required to fund these bureaucracies that only exist to "keep us safe" from the "terrorists" that arise (or are being fabricated) as a result of our aggressive, reckless, destructive foreign policy.

 

1.  I know the military-industrial complex is large, but I disagree it's as pervasive as you may think.  Either way, you weren't getting into that...you were talking about how we'd need to scale back overseas because of fiscal concerns.  Those are not necessarily the same issue. 

 

2.  Yes, another Ron Paul explanation.  See, terrorists only exist because of our foreign policy!  If we'd just stop "bombing everyone," they'd leave us alone.  If we'd just talk to "President" Ahmadinejhad, we'd really make some progress.  If we'd just sit down and talk this out, we'd be fine.  This is where Ron Paul goes off the freaking deep end.  Yes, we need to restructure and rescale our foreign military presence.  Yes, we've sometimes meddled where we should not have.  But no, we're not causing all of own problems.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #122 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

My claim of "way beyond a correction" is/was supported by: 

 

  • The POTUS
  • Congress
  • Fed Chairman and Board
  • The Secretary of the Treasury
  • Investment bank CEO's and their boards
  • Private corporations reporting trouble accessing credit
  • Individual consumers reporting trouble getting house and car loans

 

And somehow I'm the one engaging in conjecture? 

 

First, the first 2 on your list are probably not really qualified to make that determination (really no one is because no one can really know what is "way beyond a market correct"). Second, the first 4 (and possibly the first 6) on your list all had something to gain (power, control) by over-stating the nature of the situation in order to justify gaining increased powers. Here's you're engaging in what's called an appeal to authority.

 

Third, I posted three links (by people who did not have anything particular to gain) which addressed this supposed "frozen credit" situation each of which, at that time, analyzed the situation and seriously questioned this claim.

 

Fourth...yes, you are. You've failed to provide any real evidence beyond the claims of people who had much to gain by over-stating the severity of the situation.

 

So there is evidence that the situation, while bad, was not quite as dire and catastrophic as we have been told by people who had something big to gain if the situation was made out to be as catastrophic as we have been told. In short they had a conflict of interest so whatever legitimate authority they might have had ought to be legitimately questioned.


Edited by MJ1970 - 4/20/12 at 12:07pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #123 of 226

MJ, you are essentially claiming there was some sort of conspiracy to defraud taxpayers out of nearly a trillion dollars.   You are claiming that the large banks, the Fed, Treasury etc. all made things seem worse than they were.  The burden of proof here is clearly on you.  Three links do not a case make.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #124 of 226
Thread Starter 

Yeah, by the ultrawealthy.  Class warfare of rich against everyone else.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #125 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

MJ, you are essentially claiming there was some sort of conspiracy to defraud taxpayers out of nearly a trillion dollars.   You are claiming that the large banks, the Fed, Treasury etc. all made things seem worse than they were.  The burden of proof here is clearly on you.  

 

Pretty much, yeah. I think they all collectively saw it as an opportunity to expand their power...and...look...it did! I think they were also blinded by their base statist + Keynesian perspective. That didn't help I'm sure.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Three links do not a case make.  

 

Well, they at least take a little wind out of the sails of the "frozen credit" market which was one of the major pillars on which this thing was based.

 

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #126 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Yeah, by the ultrawealthy.  Class warfare of rich against everyone else.

 

But thankfully, for them, they have a large collection of useful idiots to keep lobbying for more and more government power to do more and more of all this.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #127 of 226

In a slightly related story:

 

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/20/romney-asks-gop-delegates-to-sign-pledge-but-some-refuse/

 

Mitt Romney is going to get the shock of his life at the convention.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

post #128 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

In a slightly related story:

 

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/20/romney-asks-gop-delegates-to-sign-pledge-but-some-refuse/

 

Mitt Romney is going to get the shock of his life at the convention.

 

Why would this be a shock? Most conventions are far from uninimous (unless it is the last vote.) Even then there are abstentions for goodness knows what reason. In 1980 Reagan had to overcoming the sitting President Ford being offered up as VP (again) and then still had John Anderson bolt and run as an independent.

 

I'm still shocked about whenever folks make picking a president sound like such a tidy process.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #129 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

 

 

Why would this be a shock? Most conventions are far from uninimous (unless it is the last vote.) Even then there are abstentions for goodness knows what reason. In 1980 Reagan had to overcoming the sitting President Ford being offered up as VP (again) and then still had John Anderson bolt and run as an independent.

 

I'm still shocked about whenever folks make picking a president sound like such a tidy process.

 

But even more than that, we all know that CNN has wanted to have their say in selecting the Republican presidential nominee from day one. ;)

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #130 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

 

Pretty much, yeah. I think they all collectively saw it as an opportunity to expand their power...and...look...it did! I think they were also blinded by their base statist + Keynesian perspective. That didn't help I'm sure.

 

 

 

Well, they at least take a little wind out of the sails of the "frozen credit" market which was one of the major pillars on which this thing was based.

 

 

You think.  You THINK.  Well, you're entitled to think whatever you want.  But you don't have any proof.  As for the credit markets, it really depends what you read and what you think "frozen" means.  Here are some links that seem to refute yours:

 

http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/2008/10/03/americas-credit-catastrophe

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/3109892/Credit-market-frozen-as-banks-refuse-to-lend.html

 

The subprime crisis was already kicking in during 2008, making it harder for even qualified borrowers to get a loan. I know...I was one of them.  In the Spring of 2008, my good credit score and I took almost three months to get approval for the home I was building.  Credit standards went through the roof.  It used to be that anything over 600...you were good.  By the time I bought, anyone under 750 or even 800 was scrutinized.  Ditto on car loans.

 

So "frozen?"  Well, maybe that's not the most accurate term.  But the credit markets upon which our economy depends were in very bad shape.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #131 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You think.  You THINK.  Well, you're entitled to think whatever you want.  But you don't have any proof.

 

Well I guess we're even then.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Here are some links that seem to refute yours:

 

http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/2008/10/03/americas-credit-catastrophe

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/3109892/Credit-market-frozen-as-banks-refuse-to-lend.html

 

The subprime crisis was already kicking in during 2008, making it harder for even qualified borrowers to get a loan. I know...I was one of them.  In the Spring of 2008, my good credit score and I took almost three months to get approval for the home I was building.  Credit standards went through the roof.  It used to be that anything over 600...you were good.  By the time I bought, anyone under 750 or even 800 was scrutinized.  Ditto on car loans.

 

So "frozen?"  Well, maybe that's not the most accurate term.  But the credit markets upon which our economy depends were in very bad shape.  

 

Anecdotal "evidence" aside you (and others) are mis-reading what was going on. I'm not saying there wasn't skittishness and even some credit and borrowing issues. This a far cry from "frozen" as those previous links pointed out. Furthermore, the skittishness was a direct result of the indecision in Congress. If they had just said "No! Period. No Bailouts." the market would have readjusted to the new stable situation. What the markets were waiting for was the high probability of a bailout.

 

You ought to take a step back on this one. Look at the whole picture. The Armageddon narrative was a scare tactic. It's a classic play.

 

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #132 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

 

Well I guess we're even then.

 

 

 

Anecdotal "evidence" aside you (and others) are mis-reading what was going on. I'm not saying there wasn't skittishness and even some credit and borrowing issues. This a far cry from "frozen" as those previous links pointed out. Furthermore, the skittishness was a direct result of the indecision in Congress. If they had just said "No! Period. No Bailouts." the market would have readjusted to the new stable situation. What the markets were waiting for was the high probability of a bailout.

 

You ought to take a step back on this one. Look at the whole picture. The Armageddon narrative was a scare tactic. It's a classic play.

 

 

You're just making crap up now.  You have no idea what would have happened.  As for a scare tactic, who was employing it?  Who is the master puppeteer?  

 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #133 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You're just making crap up now.

 

And you're just believing shit unquestioningly from a handful of people who now have a bunch more power as result of their own claims.

 

Worse, you admit to recognizing a pattern wherein political and governmental "leaders" utilize fear (often elevated fear) to justify and grab for more power...but hold this out as the exception.

 

Good work.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You have no idea what would have happened.

 

Nor do you, but you claim to know with near certainty to the point where questioning the need for the actions taken is considered nuts.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

As for a scare tactic, who was employing it?  Who is the master puppeteer?

 

Well I'd put Paulson and Bernanke at the top of the list. Most of it stems from these two geniuses who never saw this coming until it happened but expect us to believe them when the predicted what would happen next. :rolleyes:


Edited by MJ1970 - 4/21/12 at 2:35pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #134 of 226

 

MJ:

 

 

 

Quote:

And you're just believing shit unquestioningly from a handful of people who now have a bunch more power as result of their own claims.

 

 

A handful? It's a lot more than that.  And Bernanke and Paulson have no more power than they did.  Are you referring to the banks?  

Quote:
Nor do you, but you claim to know with near certainty to the point where questioning the need for the actions taken is considered nuts.

 

I've got no problem with you or anyone else questioning the actions taken.  What I've saying is that you're posing a conspiracy theory and trying to reverse the burden of proof while doing so.  

 

 

 

Quote:
Well I'd put Paulson and Bernanke at the top of the list. Most of it stems from these two geniuses who never saw this coming until it happened but expect us to believe them when the predicted what would happen next. :rolleyes:

 

So they should have seen it coming, but they didn't.  Therefore, they shouldn't have been trusted to do or say anything once it did.  Got it.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #135 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And Bernanke and Paulson have no more power than they did.

 

Holy cow! Do you really believe that?!

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I've got no problem with you or anyone else questioning the actions taken.  What I've saying is that you're posing a conspiracy theory and trying to reverse the burden of proof while doing so.

 

Actually I'm not proposing an explicit conspiracy theory. Perhaps your assuming that has created a mental block in your ability to recognize what's happened. I'm simply suggesting that a major set of events happened and through a combination of their flawed Keynesian perspectives and their desire for control and their God complexes, not to mention their own fear, these people panicked...they either thought or made the problems seem more dire than they really were in order to gain the power and control necessary to "fix" the problem. See it's not so much an overt "conspiracy."

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So they should have seen it coming, but they didn't.  Therefore, they shouldn't have been trusted to do or say anything once it did.  Got it.  

 

Well...they apparently didn't see it coming. What I' saying is simply that it's a good reason to greet their further predictions with quite a bit of skepticism. Their vested interest in gaining additional powers would be reason for additional skepticism. Obviously you disagree.

 


Edited by MJ1970 - 4/21/12 at 9:25pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #136 of 226

 

 

Quote:
Holy cow! Do you really believe that?!

 

Yes.  Why don't you?  Paulson is teaching.  Bernanke is still Fed chairman.  Are you claiming it was all designed to increase the Fed's power?

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Actually I'm not proposing an explicit conspiracy theory. Perhaps your assuming that has created a mental block in your ability to recognize what's happened. I'm simply suggesting that a major set of events happened and through a combination of their flawed Keynesian perspectives and their desire for control and their God complexes, not to mention their own fear, these people panicked...they either thought or made the problems seem more dire than they really were in order to gain the power and control necessary to "fix" the problem. See it's not so much an overt "conspiracy."

 

But that IS a conspiracy theory.  You're claiming 1) They caused the crisis and 2) They made it seem worse to gain more  power.  In this case, that was a one-time $700 billion bailout--most of which has been repaid.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:

Well...they apparently didn't see it coming. What I' saying is simply that it's a good reason to greet their further predictions with quite a bit of skepticism. Their vested interest in gaining additional powers would be reason for additional skepticism. Obviously you disagree.

 

 

And what are their predictions?  Obviously if Bernanke and Geithner come back and say "we need another trillion to avoid another collapse," I'm going to be skeptical.  But that doesn't mean the original crisis wasn't every bit as bad as they said it was. 

 

 

 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #137 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Are you claiming it was all designed to increase the Fed's power?

 

Yes. But not only that, setting a terrible precedent that will certainly have negative consequences in the future. The simple act of bailout alone was a terrible power grab. The specifics of how the Fed did it and that it expanded the scope of the things it can do beyond its core charter...this is not a good thing.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

But that IS a conspiracy theory.

 

No. *sigh* But if it makes you feel better to categorize it that way in order to dismiss what I'm saying, go for it. :rolleyes:

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And what are their predictions?  Obviously if Bernanke and Geithner come back and say "we need another trillion to avoid another collapse," I'm going to be skeptical.  But that doesn't mean the original crisis wasn't every bit as bad as they said it was.

 

Agreed. However now we're back to begging the question about the badness of the original crisis not to mention your allowing this one exception to the pattern of government "leaders" using fear to justify an increase in their power and control.

 

But whatever. :-\

 

You go on believing that the world would have come to an end if Mommy and Poppy govn't had not stepped in to save us all if that makes you feel better.

 

I will submit that the best thing this did was to push the real crisis out...further down the road. They kicked the can down the road, they did not solve the problem. They have also likely made it worse long-term.

 


Edited by MJ1970 - 4/22/12 at 9:41am

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #138 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

We should take a page from Bhutan's book and measure our success based on GNH.

 

This is just too much. If we were to actually do this, what penalties would we give to the world's atheists for dragging down the curve?

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
post #139 of 226
Thread Starter 

None.  Atheists don't drag down the curve.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #140 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

None.  Atheists don't drag down the curve.

 

Really? Because you often seem to be the angriest man on the board. lol.gif

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
post #141 of 226
Thread Starter 

Yeah, and the homophobes don't drag you down?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #142 of 226

If you're casually referring to anyone who disagrees with homosexuality as a valid lifestyle choice, I see hundreds of them each Sunday morning, and the overwhelming majority seem to be very happy people. More than a few of them are people who formerly identified as gay or lesbian.

 

Of course, a worship service tends to have that effect on people. But my experience is that Christians, even when working in the midst of the world's crappiest situations and struggling daily with their own shortcomings, still crack a smile and are generally happy.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
post #143 of 226
Thread Starter 

I'm sure the repressed homosexuals are not at all deeply conflicted. 

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #144 of 226

Jesus heals all kinds of people of all kinds of personal sins.

In my experience, former homosexuals, drug users, prostitutes and the like are the ones who tend to sing the loudest.

 

The word Gospel literally means 'Good News'. That, in a nutshell, is what makes Christians so happy.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
post #145 of 226
Thread Starter 

They sing the loudest because they hurt the most on the inside.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #146 of 226

And your evidence for this is what?

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
post #147 of 226
Thread Starter 

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #148 of 226
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:

Those participants who reported their heterosexuality despite having hidden same-sex desires were also the most likely to show hostility toward gay individuals, including self-reported anti-gay attitudes, endorsement of anti-gay policies and discrimination such as supporting harsher punishments for homosexuals.

 

The research may help to explain the underpinnings of anti-gay bullying and hate crimes, the researchers note. People in denial about their own sexual orientation, perhaps a denial fostered by authoritarian and homophobic parents, may feel a threat from other gay and lesbian individuals. Lashing out may ultimately be an indicator of the person's own internal conflict with sexual orientation.

 

And religion also places that authoritarian, homophobic role quite well.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #149 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Actually, this new study...

 

http://www.livescience.com/19563-homophobia-hidden-homosexuals.html

 

Let me get this straight. You are accusing ex-homosexuals-turned-Christians of homophobia, based on this study?

So they can check out but never leave, eh? It's amazing how far some people will go to condemn others, just to satisfy their own worldview.

 

 

But at least we can agree that drug users and prostitutes are among those in our society that "hurt the most inside."

 

Does this mean you'll be re-evaluating your support of liberalizing drug and prostitution laws?

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
post #150 of 226
Thread Starter 

Nah, I was clearly just referring to the alleged "ex-gays",  You are being obtuse.

 

I'm accusing the entire worldview that being gay is wrong as homophobia.  I'm accusing you and your church of being cruel to these people, pressuring them to repress who they really are.  I think that is one of the most disgusting things possible to be proud of.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #151 of 226

MJ:

 

 

 

Quote:
Yes. But not only that, setting a terrible precedent that will certainly have negative consequences in the future. The simple act of bailout alone was a terrible power grab. The specifics of how the Fed did it and that it expanded the scope of the things it can do beyond its core charter...this is not a good thing.

 

That's obviously opinion, but a reasonable one.  The Fed's power has increased.  Whether or not it was done merely for that purpose is another matter.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:
No. *sigh* But if it makes you feel better to categorize it that way in order to dismiss what I'm saying, go for it. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

I'm honestly not using that term to dismiss it and/or mock you.  I'm just saying that you're alleging some pretty serious things without any real evidence.  The burden of proof for that claim  
"it was all some huge power grab and the crisis wasn't as bad as we all thought" is really on you.  That's all I mean. 

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Agreed. However now we're back to begging the question about the badness of the original crisis not to mention your allowing this one exception to the pattern of government "leaders" using fear to justify an increase in their power and control.

 

Hold on.  I am not holding it out as "one exception," as if everything the government does is for power and control.  In fact, that seems to be an assumption you're making.  

I am saying that in my judgement, what the government did with TARP was probably necessary. I don't feel like that about every action our government takes, but I also don't condemn every action either.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote:

But whatever. :-\

 

You go on believing that the world would have come to an end if Mommy and Poppy govn't had not stepped in to save us all if that makes you feel better.

 

I will submit that the best thing this did was to push the real crisis out...further down the road. They kicked the can down the road, they did not solve the problem. They have also likely made it worse long-term.

 

I don't know if the world would have come to an end, but from what I've read....yeah, I think there was a good chance of the entire financial system collapsing.  You had a spider's web of financial institutions, their private and public clients, and their clients and so forth.  Even the ones that were far away from the world of finance were publicly stating they were having trouble getting credit.  It's a judgement call...and we differ on it...which is fine.  

 

As for pushing the crisis out, you may be right.  That said, I'm not sure what they were supposed to do.  Had we done nothing and had the system collapsed (not asking you to accept it would have), that may have been worse.  I don't think the "crisis" is inevitable with the right policies, particularly in the area of sovereign debt and deficit spending.  I get the impression that you do, because of our non-sound money supply?  

 

 

 

 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #152 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I'm just saying that you're alleging some pretty serious things without any real evidence.  The burden of proof for that claim  

"it was all some huge power grab and the crisis wasn't as bad as we all thought" is really on you.  That's all I mean. 

 

And all I'm saying is that these folks alleged some pretty serious things and asked us to simply take them at their word. I'd say in that situation the burden of proof was on them to justify the drastic measures taken.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I am saying that in my judgement, what the government did with TARP was probably necessary. I don't feel like that about every action our government takes, but I also don't condemn every action either. 

 

And I'm saying it was probably not and fit a pattern (increasing in frequency in recent years) that I outlined previously of using a dramatic event, possibly elevating the fear associated with it to expand the government's powers.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I don't know if the world would have come to an end, but from what I've read....yeah, I think there was a good chance of the entire financial system collapsing.  You had a spider's web of financial institutions, their private and public clients, and their clients and so forth.  Even the ones that were far away from the world of finance were publicly stating they were having trouble getting credit.  It's a judgement call...and we differ on it...which is fine.

 

And from what I've read, the "good chance of the entire financial system collapsing" is over stating things.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I don't think the "crisis" is inevitable with the right policies, particularly in the area of sovereign debt and deficit spending.  I get the impression that you do, because of our non-sound money supply?

 

I think a future crisis can be softened or even avoided, but I'm not confident either of the two presidential candidates (along with Congress) has the proper economic understanding or the will do to the things necessary for that. It is a combination of debt, deficit spending (and even non-deficit spending), and (unsound) monetary policy. These things are all tightly intertwined.

 

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #153 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

 

And all I'm saying is that these folks alleged some pretty serious things and asked us to simply take them at their word. I'd say in that situation the burden of proof was on them to justify the drastic measures taken.

 

 

 

And I'm saying it was probably not and fit a pattern (increasing in frequency in recent years) that I outlined previously of using a dramatic event, possibly elevating the fear associated with it to expand the government's powers.

 

 

 

And from what I've read, the "good chance of the entire financial system collapsing" is over stating things.

 

 

 

I think a future crisis can be softened or even avoided, but I'm not confident either of the two presidential candidates (along with Congress) has the proper economic understanding or the will do to the things necessary for that. It is a combination of debt, deficit spending (and even non-deficit spending), and (unsound) monetary policy. These things are all tightly intertwined.

 

 

I agree they alleged serious things.  However, we had more than their word.  We had consequences that were already materializing.  Frankly, their word alone is not enough for me, either.  But when we see serious problems with businesses and consumers accessing credit, a major market decline, bankruptcies of several major investment banks, etc?  That's enough.  

 

As for a pattern and using emergencies...I do see the point there.  We've just reached different judgments here, both on the risk of collapse and the action taken to prevent it.  Concerning the future, I think getting back to a gold or other standard is simply not going to happen, so we need to address the first two parts of the equation.  If he's elected, I'd like to see Romney have more concrete and aggressive plans to eliminate the deficit and start paying down the debt.  What I do know is that he'd be better on this point than Barry Sotero has been.  :) 

 

 

 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #154 of 226
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

 

 

Let me get this straight. You are accusing ex-homosexuals-turned-Christians of homophobia, based on this study?

So they can check out but never leave, eh? It's amazing how far some people will go to condemn others, just to satisfy their own worldview.

 

Here's another link:

 

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201102/does-religion-make-people-happier

 

Happiest nations on Earth?  The least religious.

 

 

 

Happiest nations on Earth?  The least religious.

 

"According to Gallup data for 2010, the happiest nations were Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands. These are among the least religious countries in the world. Also according to Gallup data, Sweden, Denmark and Norway were the second, third, and fourth least religious states, being exceeded only by Estonia in their atheism.

 

Why are these European countries so happy? Their happiness is explainable in terms of a combination of national wealth and redistribution of resources via high taxation and a well-developed welfare state. So paying taxes makes people happy after all!"

 

 

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #155 of 226

Comparatively would to say that the US is a "more religious" country than Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands? And that the US is "less happy" than these countries?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #156 of 226

Ironically, BR is not religious and not happy.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

post #157 of 226
Thread Starter 

Says the person with "malcontent" in his description.  In day to day life, I'm pretty happy.  I do my best in a land that is quite oppressive to those who don't believe in fairy tales.  If the US would become more like Scandinavia, I'd be even happier.

 

You don't get to discriminate and marginalize a group of people and then say that your way is better because you are "happier".  Well, stop trying to make grown-ups' lives miserable with your nonsense.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #158 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Says the person with "malcontent" in his description.  In day to day life, I'm pretty happy.  I do my best in a land that is quite oppressive to those who don't believe in fairy tales.  If the US would become more like Scandinavia, I'd be even happier.

 

You don't get to discriminate and marginalize a group of people and then say that your way is better because you are "happier".  Well, stop trying to make grown-ups' lives miserable with your nonsense.

 

Who is trying to do that?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #159 of 226

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Who is trying to do that?  

 

You're not paying attention. People who believe different things than BR or believe things he doesn't like are oppressing him and making his life miserable.

 

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

post #160 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Says the person with "malcontent" in his description.

My title is obviously tongue-in-cheek.
Quote:
In day to day life, I'm pretty happy.

You don't seem happy.
Quote:
I do my best in a land that is quite oppressive to those who don't believe in fairy tales.

If you consider any mention of religion to be oppressive to you, I can see why you would feel that way.
Quote:
If the US would become more like Scandinavia, I'd be even happier.

What do I often hear from people when I describe my ideal... "if you don't like it then leave"?
Quote:
You don't get to discriminate and marginalize a group of people and then say that your way is better because you are "happier".  Well, stop trying to make grown-ups' lives miserable with your nonsense.

I usually dismiss everything you write after "you don't get to..." because it's followed by ad-homs, straw men, and other such silliness.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Unpleasant Truths: Reagan was for the Buffet Rule