Are there any economic beneffits from global corporations ?

[danielpalos]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

It looks something like this:

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.--Source: Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Since the government doesn't control the stock market, how is an increase in the stock market a bailout?

federal public policies account for the bailout and tax policies that benefit the wealthiest the most.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

It looks something like this:

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.--Source: Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Since the government doesn't control the stock market, how is an increase in the stock market a bailout?

federal public policies account for the bailout and tax policies that benefit the wealthiest the most.

Which policies bailed out the rich?
Be specific.
Obama raised taxes, how can his tax policies benefit the wealthiest the most?
Be specific.

Unless you're just a moron spouting BS you can't back up?

 

[CultureCitizen]

Poor (working) people don't transfer wealth to the rich. They rent their capital for a fee, and are certainly not forced to do that. It's not a wealth transfer but agreement that benefits both parties. Generally poor people are the ones who DO NOT work, in which case your point becomes even more absurd. You can't transfer something that doesn't exist.

Labour is not Capital. Better get your basic economic definitions straight first.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Poor (working) people don't transfer wealth to the rich. They rent their capital for a fee, and are certainly not forced to do that. It's not a wealth transfer but agreement that benefits both parties. Generally poor people are the ones who DO NOT work, in which case your point becomes even more absurd. You can't transfer something that doesn't exist.

Labour is not Capital. Better get your basic economic definitions straight first.

They rent their capital for a fee, and are certainly not forced to do that. It's not a wealth transfer but agreement that benefits both parties.

I read that as "poor people rent the capital (housing or cash) of the rich"

 

[CultureCitizen]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

Ever heard of QE ?
Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital ( just in case some of their other assets went sour).

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

Ever heard of QE ?
Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital ( just in case some of their other assets went sour).

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

 

[CultureCitizen]

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

Ever heard of QE ?
.

too stupid and liberal as always, wealthy are allowed to go bankrupt everyday thanks to capitalism. Ever heard of Lehman Brothers and all the others?? QE saved country from depression and was paid back like any banker expects.

Liberals bailout and cripple failed individuals everyday with no expectation of being paid back or moral hazard but lack the IQ to see it.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

And MBS of rather dubious value.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

And MBS of rather dubious value.

Wrong. Again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

Ever heard of QE ?
.

too stupid and liberal as always, wealthy are allowed to go bankrupt everyday thanks to capitalism. Ever heard of Lehman Brothers and all the others?? QE saved country from depression and was paid back like any banker expects.

Liberals bailout and cripple failed individuals everyday with no expectation of being paid back or moral hazard but lack the IQ to see it.

QE saved country from depression and was paid back like any banker expects.

QE wasn't loans. Nothing to pay back.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

And MBS of rather dubious value.

Wrong. Again.

Well , then banks should keep their MBS, I have no trouble with that.... Even if they bought them from Freddie and Fanny.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have heard of QE. I recently educated you about it.

Many business small business would be gratefull if the government stepped in and turned their assets into capital

If a small business owns some T-Bills, why do you feel that's not capital?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

And MBS of rather dubious value.

Wrong. Again.

Well , then banks should keep their MBS, I have no trouble with that.

Their capital was the same after the Fed bought the guaranteed MBS, as before.
So if you have a good answer for that bailout question, let me know.

 

[CultureCitizen]

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?
Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

And MBS of rather dubious value.

Wrong. Again.

Well , then banks should keep their MBS, I have no trouble with that.

TARP
Their capital was the same after the Fed bought the guaranteed MBS, as before.
So if you have a good answer for that bailout question, let me know.

TARP

 

[danielpalos]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

It looks something like this:

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.--Source: Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Since the government doesn't control the stock market, how is an increase in the stock market a bailout?

federal public policies account for the bailout and tax policies that benefit the wealthiest the most.

Which policies bailed out the rich?
Be specific.
Obama raised taxes, how can his tax policies benefit the wealthiest the most?
Be specific.

Unless you're just a moron spouting BS you can't back up?

Corporate welfare even has paid multimillion dollar bonuses; while, the least wealthy can't afford recourse to our laws regarding employment at will concerning unemployment compensation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

IF ? How is that relevant for the discussion ?

I'm pointing out that you don't understand QE or capital.

Is the government handing out T-Bills to small businesses or exchanging them for their account receivables ?

No.
And QE was exchanging capital in the form of bank reserves for capital in the form of bonds.

And MBS of rather dubious value.

Wrong. Again.

Well , then banks should keep their MBS, I have no trouble with that.

TARP
Their capital was the same after the Fed bought the guaranteed MBS, as before.
So if you have a good answer for that bailout question, let me know.

TARP

Yeah, those short term loans that were repaid, at a profit of tens of billions to the Treasury.

Just awful. LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's a bailout for the wealthiest look like?

It looks something like this:

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.--Source: Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Since the government doesn't control the stock market, how is an increase in the stock market a bailout?

federal public policies account for the bailout and tax policies that benefit the wealthiest the most.

Which policies bailed out the rich?
Be specific.
Obama raised taxes, how can his tax policies benefit the wealthiest the most?
Be specific.

Unless you're just a moron spouting BS you can't back up?

Corporate welfare even has paid multimillion dollar bonuses; while, the least wealthy can't afford recourse to our laws regarding employment at will concerning unemployment compensation.

Corporate welfare even has paid multimillion dollar bonuses

Bonuses? My question was about your bailout claim.
Is the weed impacting your short term memory?

 

[CultureCitizen]

And MBS of rather dubious value.

Wrong. Again.

Well , then banks should keep their MBS, I have no trouble with that.

TARP
Their capital was the same after the Fed bought the guaranteed MBS, as before.
So if you have a good answer for that bailout question, let me know.

TARP

Yeah, those short term loans that were repaid, at a profit of tens of billions to the Treasury.

Just awful. LOL!

The returns were 8.2 over 2 years. I wonder how many home owners had such a low interest rate and weren't subject to predatory lending.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wrong. Again.

Well , then banks should keep their MBS, I have no trouble with that.

TARP
Their capital was the same after the Fed bought the guaranteed MBS, as before.
So if you have a good answer for that bailout question, let me know.

TARP

Yeah, those short term loans that were repaid, at a profit of tens of billions to the Treasury.

Just awful. LOL!

The returns were 8.2 over 2 years. I wonder how many home owners had such a low interest rate and weren't subject to predatory lending.

The returns were 8.2 over 2 years.

You'll have to explain what this means. And maybe provide a link?

I wonder how many home owners had such a low interest rate

TARP rates were kinda high. I could show you.
If you're a homeowner and haven't refied since QE dropped rates into the basement, you're hopeless.