My view on why our economy is pure shit.

[Uncensored2008]

SNIP/

How about the FCC. When Pintos started blowing up, each consumer was told theirs was a unique situation. It wasn't until the Feds came in and connected the dots, then regulated the industry that car companies started ponying up the bucks. Same thing with the Corvair, the Samuari and so on.

Utter fucking bullshit.

Do you bother to research anything, or do you just make it up as you go?

The Federal Communication Commission had nothing to do with Pinto's or any other car - don't know WHAT the fuck you're babbling about there.

The case of the Pinto is that Lee Iacocca sought to improve the CAFE experian at Ford by producing a very light vehicle. The Iacocca model was 2000/2000 - the car had to be under 2000 pounds and sell for under $2,000. To meet those goals, compromises were made. One of those was to place the fuel tank behind the rear axle, which reduced the footprint of the car while retaining trunk space, thus not adding weight. In a rear end crash, the tank could be crushed between the rear bumper and the axle.

It wasn't the DOT who changed the Pinto, but Ford itself after a series of lawsuits costing millions in damages and millions more in attorney costs.

Why? Their actuaries told them it was better to let X number of people burn to death and pay them off, than to recall the cars - until of course The Fed came along and regulated them into doing so.

Bullshit - you are simply making this up as you go. You read the infamous Mother Jones crap a few decades ago, now you embellish without restraint.

Asbestos? Do you know how many people had no idea and what the odds were, that without Fed help, nothing would have changed?

ROFL

The federal government MANDATED the use of Asbestos in schools.

The shit you make up is fucking wild.

Prozac? Phen Phen?

Good thing the FDA didn't approve those....

e. coli?

Yep, the almighty government ended e. coli by lord god Obama farting an edict out of his ass.

You sure are fucking smart...

lead paint? Tainted milk?

So how many dead people is worth a "market correction"?

Why don't you just make up a figure? You just make up pretty much everything else..

Because you know, Deregulation is always better.

So while I think we over-regulate in many areas, I don't believe the pamphlet-mentality that it always works.

Based on your theory, The Ukraine, Mexico and India should be the best places in the world to live!
Got your bags packed? Me either.

Fuck but you're an idiot.

Mexico has a socialist economy. India also is officially socialist. The Ukraine has had a higher rise in GDP in the last 20 years than the USA.

Ukraine - GDP - real growth rate - Historical Data Graphs per Year

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It wasn't the DOT who changed the Pinto, but Ford itself after a series of lawsuits costing millions in damages and millions more in attorney costs.

Not to mention that Consumer Reports compiles reports on car quality 1000 times more detailed than the government. If folks didn't assume the government was looking out for them they would take responsibility for themselves and CR would have 1000 times the customer base and 1000 times the money to do a 1000 times more incredible job.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Not to mention that Consumer Reports compiles reports on car quality 1000 times more detailed than the government. If folks didn't assume the government was looking out for them they would take responsibility for themselves and CR would have 1000 times the customer base and 1000 times the money to do a 1000 times more incredible job.

Iacocca was an idiot with Ford, then went on to drive Chrysler to bankruptcy. But government sure didn't do anything to make the situation better.

It is terrible that people had to die over a $1 part, but ultimately the system worked exactly as designed. The families of those who were harmed sued the fuck out of Ford, forcing them to change their ways.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The families of those who were harmed sued the fuck out of Ford, forcing them to change their ways.

I never understood what that meant. Why not pass a law that all cars must be able to survive a 100MPH crash from all directions. It might be cheaper than distracting the companies with lots of legal stuff about whether a particular design was really within some ill defined limits or not.

 

[IndependntLogic]

SNIP/

How about the FCC. When Pintos started blowing up, each consumer was told theirs was a unique situation. It wasn't until the Feds came in and connected the dots, then regulated the industry that car companies started ponying up the bucks. Same thing with the Corvair, the Samuari and so on.

Utter fucking bullshit.
Now look here missy, you are about to get grounded! Watch that potty tongue little girl!


Do you bother to research anything, or do you just make it up as you go?

The Federal Communication Commission had nothing to do with Pinto's or any other car - don't know WHAT the fuck you're babbling about there.

The case of the Pinto is that Lee Iacocca sought to improve the CAFE experian at Ford by producing a very light vehicle. The Iacocca model was 2000/2000 - the car had to be under 2000 pounds and sell for under $2,000. To meet those goals, compromises were made. One of those was to place the fuel tank behind the rear axle, which reduced the footprint of the car while retaining trunk space, thus not adding weight. In a rear end crash, the tank could be crushed between the rear bumper and the axle.

It wasn't the DOT who changed the Pinto, but Ford itself after a series of lawsuits costing millions in damages and millions more in attorney costs.

Why? Their actuaries told them it was better to let X number of people burn to death and pay them off, than to recall the cars - until of course The Fed came along and regulated them into doing so.

Bullshit - you are simply making this up as you go. You read the infamous Mother Jones crap a few decades ago, now you embellish without restraint.

There you go again! That's it. No texting for a week!

ROFL

The federal government MANDATED the use of Asbestos in schools.

The shit you make up is fucking wild.

Okay wait. Are you okay. Now I'm beginning to become concerned...

Good thing the FDA didn't approve those....



Yep, the almighty government ended e. coli by lord god Obama farting an edict out of his ass.

You sure are fucking smart...

Thank you! Although I was actually referring to the thousands of products stopped from getting to market by the FDA, USDA and other great folks. Too bad there's not more of them!

lead paint? Tainted milk?

So how many dead people is worth a "market correction"?

Why don't you just make up a figure? You just make up pretty much everything else..

Okay. Zero. And FYI Little girl, I did not make up e. coli. It actually exist. If I had made it up, it would be called The Zaptron SuperVirus!

Because you know, Deregulation is always better.

So while I think we over-regulate in many areas, I don't believe the pamphlet-mentality that it always works.

Based on your theory, The Ukraine, Mexico and India should be the best places in the world to live!
Got your bags packed? Me either.

Fuck but you're an idiot.

Mexico has a socialist economy. India also is officially socialist. The Ukraine has had a higher rise in GDP in the last 20 years than the USA.

LOL! Mexico and India are socialists!!! Love it. Hmmm. I wonder what that voting stuff is all about? And The Ukraine??? LOL! Love it. Have you ever BEEN to The Ukraine??? Wait, wait! Tell a China story pleeeease!

Ukraine - GDP - real growth rate - Historical Data Graphs per Year

Hmmm. Okay. You're a rather hysterical little thing, aren't you? Take a deep breath. Try to get ahold of yourself sweetheart. You write like you're about to wet yourself.

Okay obviously I have insulted your religion and well, while I was just talking about things, I seem to have flipped you out. My apologies.
Okay so a few things. Yes, I got the FCC mixed up. Unlike you, I am more than happy to admit that I make mistakes and (heaven forbid!) am even wrong about stuff sometimes! But I do believe that after the lawsuits, a fed agency (could have been Transportation) stepped in and said "From now on, cars have to be made better!". I believe they even developed these things called "safety standards". Maybe not in your world though. I'm sure you feel there sure be no safety standards for anything! Because The Magical Market will send pretty unicorns to fix anything that is dangerous!

Actuaries. Okay, let's discuss them. Are you saying that no company has ever hired actuaries to figure out a cost / benefit analysis as to whether it would be better to just let a bunch of people die or become injured as opposed to the cost of lawsuits?
Because you know, the Magical Market of Holy Libertarianism makes sure that sort of thing NEVER happens, let alone often.
Okay sorry to laugh at your religion (wouldn't want some fanatic goig Jim Jones on me!) .

So okay no. Deregulation isn't always good. Deregulating the CMBS market was bad. Deregulating the junk bond markets & T&L was bad.

LOL! Almost forgot. So are there any "NON-Socialist" countries in the world? Pray tell, elighten us as to where this utopia exist! Or is one of the little downfalls of Holy Libertarianism, that not one country on the planet finds it practical?

I think you're a very good person and I like you. So please, stay calm.

Hugs & Kisses,

Your New BFF

 

[samjones]

of course the best economists and newspapers blame the housing crisis on a liberal government designed to get people into homes the Republican free market said they could not afford.

No - they don't. And your statement in no way relates to the facts of the Bush Housing Bubble that led to the financial crisis of '08.

Fan/Fred resisted using fair value pricing for a long time. It was the Bush White House that forced Fan/Fred to use mark-to-market. It was more off-the-books accounting by bankers that imposed this credit default swap charade on the American financial system and it was the Bush bankrollers that defrauded the people out of the American Dream.

If there was justice they would be dealt with Bernie Madoff-style. Instead they're given a microphone and allowed to whine "class warfare" because marginal tax rates might incease.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hmmm. Okay. You're a rather hysterical little thing, aren't you? Take a deep breath. Try to get ahold of yourself sweetheart. You write like you're about to wet yourself.

Okay obviously I have insulted your religion and well, while I was just talking about things, I seem to have flipped you out. My apologies.
Okay so a few things. Yes, I got the FCC mixed up. Unlike you, I am more than happy to admit that I make mistakes and (heaven forbid!) am even wrong about stuff sometimes! But I do believe that after the lawsuits, a fed agency (could have been Transportation) stepped in and said "From now on, cars have to be made better!". I believe they even developed these things called "safety standards". Maybe not in your world though. I'm sure you feel there sure be no safety standards for anything! Because The Magical Market will send pretty unicorns to fix anything that is dangerous!

Actuaries. Okay, let's discuss them. Are you saying that no company has ever hired actuaries to figure out a cost / benefit analysis as to whether it would be better to just let a bunch of people die or become injured as opposed to the cost of lawsuits?
Because you know, the Magical Market of Holy Libertarianism makes sure that sort of thing NEVER happens, let alone often.
Okay sorry to laugh at your religion (wouldn't want some fanatic goig Jim Jones on me!) .

So okay no. Deregulation isn't always good. Deregulating the CMBS market was bad. Deregulating the junk bond markets & T&L was bad.

LOL! Almost forgot. So are there any "NON-Socialist" countries in the world? Pray tell, elighten us as to where this utopia exist! Or is one of the little downfalls of Holy Libertarianism, that not one country on the planet finds it practical?

I think you're a very good person and I like you. So please, stay calm.

Hugs & Kisses,

Your New BFF

Say sparky, What is Pemex?

What are "nationalized industries?"

Look, you're a leftist - meaning you're stupid... Still.

Socialism in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Such a dumb little fuck....

 

[Uncensored2008]

No - they don't. And your statement in no way relates to the facts of the Bush Housing Bubble that led to the financial crisis of '08.

Fan/Fred resisted using fair value pricing for a long time. It was the Bush White House that forced Fan/Fred to use mark-to-market. It was more off-the-books accounting by bankers that imposed this credit default swap charade on the American financial system and it was the Bush bankrollers that defrauded the people out of the American Dream.

If there was justice they would be dealt with Bernie Madoff-style. Instead they're given a microphone and allowed to whine "class warfare" because marginal tax rates might incease.

What a fucking lie.

 

[samjones]

No - they don't. And your statement in no way relates to the facts of the Bush Housing Bubble that led to the financial crisis of '08.

Fan/Fred resisted using fair value pricing for a long time. It was the Bush White House that forced Fan/Fred to use mark-to-market. It was more off-the-books accounting by bankers that imposed this credit default swap charade on the American financial system and it was the Bush bankrollers that defrauded the people out of the American Dream.

If there was justice they would be dealt with Bernie Madoff-style. Instead they're given a microphone and allowed to whine "class warfare" because marginal tax rates might incease.

What a fucking lie.

No it's not. The President of the United States is a powerful man and he controls lots of things - including what accounting standards Fannie used.

 

[samjones]

What happened in last year, the government should be aware of that pretty much as there is every possibility of experiencing that again.

Ya think? Since not a single thing has been done to stop it from happening again, I would say it's a virtual certainty.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No it's not. The President of the United States is a powerful man and he controls lots of things - including what accounting standards Fannie used.

President has little if anything to do with it:

1) The Board (FASB)issues an Accounting Standards Update describing amendments to the Accounting Standards Codification.

2) Fanny/Freddie were huge corrupt liberal bureaucracies:

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO. I'm not sure what all the letters stand for. [Note to Warren: They stand for Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.] But if you go to OFHEO's website, you'll find that its purpose was to just watch over these two companies. OFHEO had 200 employees. Their job was simply to look at two companies and say, "Are these guys behaving like they're supposed to?" And of course what happened were two of the greatest accounting misstatements in history while these 200 people had their jobs. It's incredible. I mean, two for two!

3) Its true that if a President had a strong position about what accounting standards were best he could be influential but normally a president does not get involved much which explains why Bush and BO had same policy or lack thereof on FASB 157.

 

[samjones]

No it's not. The President of the United States is a powerful man and he controls lots of things - including what accounting standards Fannie used.

President has little if anything to do with it:

1) The Board (FASB)issues an Accounting Standards Update describing amendments to the Accounting Standards Codification.

2) Fanny/Freddie were huge corrupt liberal bureaucracies:

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO....
3) Its true that if a President had a strong position about what accounting standards were best he could be influential but normally a president does not get involved much which explains why Bush and BO had same policy or lack thereof on FASB 157.

So, OFHEO is a part of HUD which is a cabinet agency. Perhaps you are correct. Perhaps Bush had little if anything to do with the running of his own cabinet, but I'll choose not be so cynical at this juncture.

The SEC is made of presidential appointees, and while it's true they operate with much autonomy, the Presider can certaintly exert much inflluence on their approach to enforcement.... In fact, I believe he could simply override them when the force governmental agencies and quasi-governmental agencies to adopt a specific accounting standard. Not being a member of the Supreme Court, you can take my opinion as being non-authoritative on that. Let's face facts - the SEC does what the President tells them to do.... I belive a couple of Bush's SEC Chairs were Skull and Bones boys.

We won't know because Bush said nary a word about FAS157 and the SEC just went ahead an force Fannie to use it. Perhaps nobody at the SEC really understood accounting and finance.

Glad I could help you with the civics lesson, Ed.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No it's not. The President of the United States is a powerful man and he controls lots of things - including what accounting standards Fannie used.

President has little if anything to do with it:

1) The Board (FASB)issues an Accounting Standards Update describing amendments to the Accounting Standards Codification.

2) Fanny/Freddie were huge corrupt liberal bureaucracies:

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO....
3) Its true that if a President had a strong position about what accounting standards were best he could be influential but normally a president does not get involved much which explains why Bush and BO had same policy or lack thereof on FASB 157.[/QUOTE]

So, OFHEO is a part of HUD which is a cabinet agency. Perhaps you are correct. Perhaps Bush had little if anything to do with the running of his own cabinet, but I'll choose not be so cynical at this juncture.

obviously Bush and BO had no position which makes my point

The SEC is made of presidential appointees, and while it's true they operate with much autonomy, the Presider can certaintly exert much inflluence on their approach to enforcement.... In fact, I believe he could simply override them when the force governmental agencies and quasi-governmental agencies to adopt a specific accounting standard. Not being a member of the Supreme Court, you can take my opinion as being non-authoritative on that. Let's face facts - the SEC does what the President tells them to do.... I belive a couple of Bush's SEC Chairs were Skull and Bones boys.

We won't know because Bush said nary a word about FAS157 and the SEC just went ahead an force Fannie to use it. Perhaps nobody at the SEC really understood accounting and finance.

again Bush and BO despite being opposites did nothing which makes my point that president is too far away

Glad I could help you with the civics lesson, Ed.

what on earth are you talking about. You cant win a debate if your life depends on it so you just pretend like a liberal ??

 

[samjones]

obviously Bush and BO had no position which makes my point
....
\again Bush and BO despite being opposites did nothing which makes my point that president is too far away

Glad I could help you with the civics lesson, Ed.

what on earth are you talking about. You cant win a debate if your life depends on it so you just pretend like a liberal ??

I'm not trying to win a debate. I'm trying to teach you a bit about the country you live in, because you seem to carry around a dangerous mix of misinformation and ignorance.

So.... back to where we were. Are you seriously contending that Bill Clinton is responsible for the financial crisis of '08 because he was competent enough to see that his policies would cause a problem 8 - 10 years down the line.

.... But George Bush (and Barack Obama) get a pass because they (like you) don't really understand how the Federal Government works?

I'll help you with one thing. If you're complaining about The Gorernment of the United States of America and you're not talking specifically about the Supreme Court or Congress then chances are pretty good that you're complaining about The White House. Because almost everyone in the Federal Government calls the President his or her boss. The President of the United States of America is a very, very, very powerful man.

If you're complaing about the Fed you're complaining about a presidential apointee. If you're complaining about Greenspan, he was nominated by Reagan (yes, that Reagan), 2 Bush's and a Clinton. Ben Benanke is a Bush nominee. If you consider the actions of the Fed to be some kind of "liberal plot" then you're probably just showing how ignorant you are about the workings of the Fed.

If you think that someone other than the President is responsible for HUD or the SEC then you're also likely equally ignorant.

Since you do this alot I think it's time for you to carefully consider what I've written here and consider another approach to pointlessly partisan rhetoric.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So.... back to where we were. Are you seriously contending that Bill Clinton is responsible for the financial crisis of '08 because he was competent enough to see that his policies would cause a problem 8 - 10 years down the line.

if I contended that I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away again with your liberal tail between your legs.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The President of the United States of America is a very, very, very powerful man.

interesting that you find things a second grader would know, profound

 

[samjones]

The President of the United States of America is a very, very, very powerful man.

interesting that you find things a second grader would know, profound

It doesn't surprise me to find out that people don't know things that a second grader should know. Like when you insist that "liberals" caused the financial crisis of '08 even though it is clear and obvious that this was solely the fault of the Bush Administration.

This is why, on his way out the door, George W. Bush was being considered probably the worst president in the history of the country by most historians and his own party, feeling so badly betrayed split and splintered into this strange thing called a "Tea Party" plus the ever-present Libertarian Ron Paul. The Republican Party remains in utter shambles and relies mostly on being difficult and distorting the truth and simply lying to try to repair their legacy.

People don't forget how badly George W. Bush dicked over American. Not when I'm around they don't.

 

[sealybobo]

So, I have realized that since the Occupy movement, quite a few people do not understand capitalism. OWS was convinced that capitalism was the cause of their problems and personal failures. Unfortunately, they succumbed to mistaking capitalism for corporatism. If you do not know the difference, please google it. If you think corporatism is capitalism, you will seek government intervention in a way that surpasses corporatism, and that is socialism. These OWSers have it backwards, as do many of Americans.

Capitalism is not the problem, it is the solution. Capitalism has not existed for a century. How about we give it another shot? Get government out of the subsidy game, get government out of anything involving business. Government's only job is to regulate currency and they can't even get that right (see article 1 section 8).

Corporatism is not capitalism...and socialism is not the answer. Get the government out. Restore capitalism.

Thank you.

Maybe it is you who doesn't understand while the GOP talks about capitalism, they've been practicing corporatism.

And to answer your question if we will give you another chance? The answer is no. Mitt and Santorum want to return to the Bush era. It doesn't work. And when it wasn't working, you said it was working, because it was working for the top 1%. Just not the rest of us.

You want to give even more tax breaks to the rich and corporations, which means you will shift the burden onto us. Righties don't seem to understand this.

We need to regulate nafta and bring jobs back home. We need more unions. Higher wages for us, not the CEO. His pay has already quadupled. Ours has not.

And imprison employers who hire illegals. America has two signs on our border. One big and one small.

stay out and HELP WANTED.
Obama's way is working. The economy is getting better. No way we put control back in the GOP's hands. Libertarians are insane.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, I have realized that since the Occupy movement, quite a few people do not understand capitalism. OWS was convinced that capitalism was the cause of their problems and personal failures. Unfortunately, they succumbed to mistaking capitalism for corporatism. If you do not know the difference, please google it. If you think corporatism is capitalism, you will seek government intervention in a way that surpasses corporatism, and that is socialism. These OWSers have it backwards, as do many of Americans.

Capitalism is not the problem, it is the solution. Capitalism has not existed for a century. How about we give it another shot? Get government out of the subsidy game, get government out of anything involving business. Government's only job is to regulate currency and they can't even get that right (see article 1 section 8).

Corporatism is not capitalism...and socialism is not the answer. Get the government out. Restore capitalism.

Thank you.

Maybe it is you who doesn't understand while the GOP talks about capitalism, they've been practicing corporatism.

And to answer your question if we will give you another chance? The answer is no. Mitt and Santorum want to return to the Bush era. It doesn't work. And when it wasn't working, you said it was working, because it was working for the top 1%. Just not the rest of us.

You want to give even more tax breaks to the rich and corporations, which means you will shift the burden onto us. Righties don't seem to understand this.

We need to regulate nafta and bring jobs back home. We need more unions. Higher wages for us, not the CEO. His pay has already quadupled. Ours has not.

And imprison employers who hire illegals. America has two signs on our border. One big and one small.

stay out and HELP WANTED.
Obama's way is working. The economy is getting better. No way we put control back in the GOP's hands. Libertarians are insane.

OMG! That's funny!

 

[itfitzme]

OWS was convinced that capitalism was the cause of their problems and personal failures.

Occupy Wall Street - Does it still exist?

Just a quick read through Wikipedia, I find the following pertinent info. It spells out the OWS tended to be generally focused on highlighting general problems that they don't want with less focus on actual goals to achieve this end.

Still, among the more specific goals, one that is repeated is the issue of corporate influence. Nothing appears to indicate any issue with capitalism or the free market.

Wikipedia -
"The protests are against social and economic inequality, high unemployment, greed, as well as corruption and the undue influence of corporations on government—particularly from the financial services sector. "

"Some protesters say they want, in part, more and better jobs, more equal distribution of income, bank reform, and a reduction of the influence of corporations on politics"

"while no one person can speak for the movement, he believes that the goal of the protests is economic justice, specifically, a "transaction tax" on international financial speculation, the reinstatement of the Glass-Stegall Act and the revocation of corporate personhood."

Occupy Wall Street - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, it seems that, in fact, if the OWS can be said to have had a central goal, it would be to get rid of corporatism. It had no focus on capitalism at all.