Do You Know the Answers to BOTH of the Following Questions?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Mustang, Jan 17, 2012.

  1. Mustang
    Offline

    Mustang Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Messages:
    7,218
    Thanks Received:
    1,300
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    39° 44 mins 21 secs N, 104° 59 mins 5 secs W
    Ratings:
    +1,792
    Question #1

    Q. What is the current amount of the national debt?

    A. While the national debt continues to rise, the current national debt is:
    $15.2 Trillion

    U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

    Question #2

    Q. How much US household wealth was lost in the 2008 financial meltdown?

    A. $14 Trillion

    So, the gov't engaged in a massive bailout of the financial industry AFTER it tanked the economy, and consumers took it in the shorts.

    Consequently, I contend that if you want to be angry with gov't. you're anger is misplaced if you're anger is directed at "deficit spending."

    You should be angry at the gov't deregulation of the banks (allowing investment banks and commercial banks to merge) which was pushed by BOTH political parties, as well as the gov't allowing derivatives to be traded in an unregulated fashion. Again, that was supported by both political parties.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    Nice post...although it was Republican Senator Phil Gramm that snuck a deregulation amendment into a spending bill on the day before Christmas recess that deregulated the financial industry.
     
  3. francoHFW
    Online

    francoHFW Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    33,487
    Thanks Received:
    2,178
    Trophy Points:
    1,115
    Location:
    NY 26th FINALLY DEM!
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    "You should be angry at the gov't deregulation of the banks (allowing investment banks and commercial banks to merge) which was pushed by BOTH political parties, as well as the gov't allowing derivatives to be traded in an unregulated fashion. Again, that was supported by both political parties."

    BS. The Pubs led all the way...
     
  4. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    56,145
    Thanks Received:
    9,350
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,598
    This is how the passing of the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 is frequently portrayed; as something Phil Gramm snuck by the House and Senate just before Christmas.

    This is disingenuous in the extreme. With few exceptions, everyone in the House and Senate were in love with the CFMA and voted for it in full knowledge of what it was.

    The CFMA had been voted on several times that year, passing the House and Senate votes each and every time. However, there were differences between the House and Senate versions which had to be reconciled, and so there were repeated versions voted on as various negotiations occurred. This is the normal legislative process.

    When the final version was complete, it was tacked on an appropriations bill for expediency since time was now short. But this was not done as anything approaching sneaky. Everyone knew what it was and it received an overwhelming Aye vote from both houses.

    It passed in the House 377-4, and in the Senate by an equally large margin. This was a bi-partisan Act all the way.

    Why do I know so much about this? Because I frequently argue this piece of legislation was one of the singular great causes of the recent crash and have actually read it. I particulary like to point out Section 117:

    Whenever a Republican whines about "states rights" when they don't like something, I just think about how willfully they surrendered up states rights in the CFMA.

    This section, more than any other, is an open admission that derivatives are not just gambling, but an out and out scam. A bucket shop. And by passing this bill, Congress was telling Wall Street, "Gentlemen, you are now free to rip off the common man investor without fear of prosecution."
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012
  5. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +915
    Kwestion #3. If you saw a train coming why did you not jump off the tracks ?
     
  6. BillyV
    Offline

    BillyV Antidisestablishmentarian

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    591
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +118
    These numbers were absolutely true - at the end of the first quarter of 2009 (as the footnoted item at Wikipedia indicates). The Dow stood at what, 6,000 then? I'm sure there was wealth lost, but you might want to update it a bit. And in fairness, a bubble by definition is caused by something that is overvalued; comparing household real estate wealth at the top of a fairy tale "bubble" to where it landed is only a good approach if you're trying to imply the very scariest numbers (to make your point?).
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. CrusaderFrank
    Online

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,245
    Thanks Received:
    14,915
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +37,029
    Banks are deregulated? Really?

    Does that mean Fannie and Freddie weren't handing out de facto AAA rating to No Income No Asset Loans?
     
  8. hortysir
    Offline

    hortysir In Memorial of 47

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    20,459
    Thanks Received:
    4,027
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Lakeland, FL
    Ratings:
    +6,296
    #4) How much is our current GDP (total worth)?

    $15.1 trillion, or $100 billion LESS than our debt.


    And there's discussion of another debt-ceiling increase?!!!!

    Fucking idiots.
     
  9. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    56,145
    Thanks Received:
    9,350
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,598
    The problem is that Americans leveraged themselves against that fairy tale number. They bought a house at inflated values, and then to make matters worse, took out HELOCs against the fairy tale equity they had. And the more income you had, the greater debts you were allowed to take on.

    And those debts were further leveraged with derivatives. Derivatives are disaster force multipliers. If the problem was just too many people took out loans they couldn't afford, the global crisis would not have been anywhere near as great as it is.

    Those debts are very real. And we won't fully recover until substantial deleveraging of public and private debts occurs.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012
  10. BillyV
    Offline

    BillyV Antidisestablishmentarian

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    591
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +118
    All of that may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that we are today not that far from the 2007 peak; at that time it was $64 trillion, and at the end of the third quarter of 2011, it stood at $57.5 trillion after a horrific quarter for stocks. I couldn't find a number for the final quarter of 2011, but I'm guessing with the stock market recovering most of its losses from the third quarter, it's probably around $60 trillion. Now $4 trillion is a significant loss; wouldn't that have made enough of an impact, rather than using the March 2009 number to create a $14 trillion number that is ancient history?
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012

Share This Page