The massive tax cut like the one in the Bush years didn’t benefit workers for a very simple reason

[edthecynic]

And you're basing your claim on the "pilot program" you found?

It was the program being used during the time period in question. The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

Plenty of fixed rate subprime loans, many purchased by Fannie and Freddie, also failed.

If by "plenty" you mean relatively few, then you would be correct.

Look at how few Prime Fixed (the ones Fannie and Freddie used to buy exclusively) got foreclosed.
They really goosed the bubble by purchasing more than $1.2 trillion (with a T!!!) of the subprime crap.

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Clinton CRA loans were to QUALIFIED borrowers at a max of 97% of the value of the home and required a down payment for a fixed rate of 2% above prime, but if the borrower made their payments on time for two years the loan reverted to prime.


I don't believe you. Link?

You are right, it was 1% above prime, I stand corrected.
And the point was that it was the subprime ARMs that were the risky loans, not the FIXED RATE CRA, Fannie Mae loans.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

You are right, it was 1% above prime, I stand corrected.

And now you'll stand corrected again.

consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage

See the difference between the Prime Rate and the rate on a 30 year conventional mortgage?
It's in post #171.

And the point was that it was the subprime ARMs that were the risky loans, not the FIXED RATE CRA, Fannie Mae loans.

The point was that all the loans to subprime borrowers were risky.
That's why Fannie and Freddie never used to buy them. They were limited to conforming loans.

ALL loans are risky, even conforming loans, the difference is the degree of risk, and there is a world of difference between Bush's ARM loans and Clinton's fixed rate loans. Bush still owns the Bush Housing Crash.

ALL loans are risky, even conforming loans, the difference is the degree of risk

Exactly. And that's why Clinton forcing Fannie and Freddie to make 50% of their mortgage purchases subprime mortgages was a stupid idea. And Bush making them buy 55% subprime was even worse.

Government housing loans had a very low foreclosure rate, Bush's subprime ARMs top the chart.

Government housing loans had a very low foreclosure rate

Obviously. That's why they needed nearly $200 billion in bailouts.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And you're basing your claim on the "pilot program" you found?

It was the program being used during the time period in question. The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

Plenty of fixed rate subprime loans, many purchased by Fannie and Freddie, also failed.

If by "plenty" you mean relatively few, then you would be correct.

Look at how few Prime Fixed (the ones Fannie and Freddie used to buy exclusively) got foreclosed.
They really goosed the bubble by purchasing more than $1.2 trillion (with a T!!!) of the subprime crap.

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

 

[healthmyths]

It was the program being used during the time period in question. The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

Plenty of fixed rate subprime loans, many purchased by Fannie and Freddie, also failed.

If by "plenty" you mean relatively few, then you would be correct.

Look at how few Prime Fixed (the ones Fannie and Freddie used to buy exclusively) got foreclosed.
They really goosed the bubble by purchasing more than $1.2 trillion (with a T!!!) of the subprime crap.

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The fact remains, the CRA, Fannie, Freddie fixed rate loans were NOT the ARMs that caused the Bush housing crash.

Plenty of fixed rate subprime loans, many purchased by Fannie and Freddie, also failed.

If by "plenty" you mean relatively few, then you would be correct.

Look at how few Prime Fixed (the ones Fannie and Freddie used to buy exclusively) got foreclosed.
They really goosed the bubble by purchasing more than $1.2 trillion (with a T!!!) of the subprime crap.

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.
View attachment 202407

I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

 

[edthecynic]

You are right, it was 1% above prime, I stand corrected.
And the point was that it was the subprime ARMs that were the risky loans, not the FIXED RATE CRA, Fannie Mae loans.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

You are right, it was 1% above prime, I stand corrected.

And now you'll stand corrected again.

consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage

See the difference between the Prime Rate and the rate on a 30 year conventional mortgage?
It's in post #171.

And the point was that it was the subprime ARMs that were the risky loans, not the FIXED RATE CRA, Fannie Mae loans.

The point was that all the loans to subprime borrowers were risky.
That's why Fannie and Freddie never used to buy them. They were limited to conforming loans.

ALL loans are risky, even conforming loans, the difference is the degree of risk, and there is a world of difference between Bush's ARM loans and Clinton's fixed rate loans. Bush still owns the Bush Housing Crash.

ALL loans are risky, even conforming loans, the difference is the degree of risk

Exactly. And that's why Clinton forcing Fannie and Freddie to make 50% of their mortgage purchases subprime mortgages was a stupid idea. And Bush making them buy 55% subprime was even worse.

Government housing loans had a very low foreclosure rate, Bush's subprime ARMs top the chart.

Government housing loans had a very low foreclosure rate

Obviously. That's why they needed nearly $200 billion in bailouts.

Nope that was Bush's subprime ARMs that needed the bailouts, not FHA loans.

 

[edthecynic]

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

The Bush subprime ARMs were not around during Clinton's terms.

 

[bendog]

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

The Bush subprime ARMs were not around during Clinton's terms.

Irrelevant, because only poor people with itsy bitsy mortgages took down the US real estate market that was worth around 13 trillion dollars. sarcasm

 

[healthmyths]

If by "plenty" you mean relatively few, then you would be correct.

Look at how few Prime Fixed (the ones Fannie and Freddie used to buy exclusively) got foreclosed.
They really goosed the bubble by purchasing more than $1.2 trillion (with a T!!!) of the subprime crap.

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.
View attachment 202407

I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

Could have... but again... you seem to totally discount ALL the events as described below.
Did you ever consider that GWB's purpose was to KEEP the economy going IN spite of all the events that killed nearly 5,000 people, cost nearly $20 Trillion in market, real estate,
jobs, and most importantly kept Americans from going off the deep end when somethings as traumatic as 9/11, hurricanes, dot.com bust, anthrax attacks and THEN
the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred as well as liberating Iraq IN SPITE of traitors in the USA MSM and idiots that didn't seem to comprehend
that the 1991 War was never ended! No peace treaty signed with Saddam. And GWB was doing what Clinton signed in 1998 the Liberation of Iraq.
Today Iraq have 15 years of all the unrest that started with Saddam not giving a crap about half a million kids, the Mesopotamia destruction and 100,000s of Kurds he gassed..
wouldn't sign the simple I don't have WMDs.
After 15 years guess what: GDP per person $17,000 in 2017 versus Under Saddam Per person GDP when Saddam was removed in 2003 per capita GDP never rose above $637
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency

So you may say what the hell does all the above have to do with Fannie/Freddie housing bubble?

Well you tell me if YOU could have handle all the below events, while at the same time LIBERATING Iraq per the 1998 Liberation of Iraq and thus helping
the people gain 6,267% in GDP in 14 years?

Tell me what YOU'D done differently?

 

[theHawk]

The massive tax cut like the one in the Bush years didn’t benefit workers for a very simple reason

They were never supposed to.

Is that why Harry and the Hussein didn’t end the “Bush tax cuts” in 2009-2011?

Already explained to you earlier in this very thread, the GOP House refused to allow any Unemployment Insurance extension to the American workers whose lives they had destroyed if the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires was not also extended. The GOP held Americans hostage until they got tax cuts for the wealthy extended.

Wrong. First of all the Dems had a super majority in Congress. Also, the Hussein himself said it wasn’t the right time to raise taxes because of the economy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

The Bush subprime ARMs were not around during Clinton's terms.

For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts.


His most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.

At first, this quota was 30%; that is, of all the loans they bought, 30% had to be made to people at or below the median income in their communities. HUD, however, was given authority to administer these quotas, and between 1992 and 2007, the quotas were raised from 30% to 50% under Clinton in 2000 and to 55% under Bush in 2007. Despite Frank's effort to make this seem like a partisan issue, it isn't. The Bush administration was just as guilty of this error as the Clinton administration. And Frank is right to say that he eventually saw his error and corrected it when he got the power to do so in 2007, but by then it was too late.

It is certainly possible to find prime mortgages among borrowers below the median income, but when half or more of the mortgages the GSEs bought had to be made to people below that income level, it was inevitable that underwriting standards had to decline. And they did. By 2000, Fannie was offering no-downpayment loans. By 2002, Fannie and Freddie had bought well over $1 trillion of subprime and other low quality loans. Fannie and Freddie were by far the largest part of this effort, but the FHA, Federal Home Loan Banks, Veterans Administration and other agencies--all under congressional and HUD pressure--followed suit. This continued through the 1990s and 2000s until the housing bubble--created by all this government-backed spending--collapsed in 2007. As a result, in 2008, before the mortgage meltdown that triggered the crisis, there were 27 million subprime and other low quality mortgages in the US financial system. That was half of all mortgages. Of these, over 70% (19.2 million) were on the books of government agencies like Fannie and Freddie, so there is no doubt that the government created the demand for these weak loans; less than 30% (7.8 million) were held or distributed by the banks, which profited from the opportunity created by the government. When these mortgages failed in unprecedented numbers in 2008, driving down housing prices throughout the U.S., they weakened all financial institutions and caused the financial crisis.

Hey, Barney Frank: The Government Did Cause the Housing Crisis - The Atlantic

Wow! Over 19 million low quality mortgages on the books of government agencies.
Over 70% of all these crappy loans.

Even worse than I originally thought.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Look at how few Prime Fixed (the ones Fannie and Freddie used to buy exclusively) got foreclosed.
They really goosed the bubble by purchasing more than $1.2 trillion (with a T!!!) of the subprime crap.

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.
View attachment 202407

I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

Could have... but again... you seem to totally discount ALL the events as described below.
Did you ever consider that GWB's purpose was to KEEP the economy going IN spite of all the events that killed nearly 5,000 people, cost nearly $20 Trillion in market, real estate,
jobs, and most importantly kept Americans from going off the deep end when somethings as traumatic as 9/11, hurricanes, dot.com bust, anthrax attacks and THEN
the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred as well as liberating Iraq IN SPITE of traitors in the USA MSM and idiots that didn't seem to comprehend
that the 1991 War was never ended! No peace treaty signed with Saddam. And GWB was doing what Clinton signed in 1998 the Liberation of Iraq.
Today Iraq have 15 years of all the unrest that started with Saddam not giving a crap about half a million kids, the Mesopotamia destruction and 100,000s of Kurds he gassed..
wouldn't sign the simple I don't have WMDs.
After 15 years guess what: GDP per person $17,000 in 2017 versus Under Saddam Per person GDP when Saddam was removed in 2003 per capita GDP never rose above $637
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency

So you may say what the hell does all the above have to do with Fannie/Freddie housing bubble?

Well you tell me if YOU could have handle all the below events, while at the same time LIBERATING Iraq per the 1998 Liberation of Iraq and thus helping
the people gain 6,267% in GDP in 14 years?

Tell me what YOU'D done differently?
View attachment 202426

and THEN the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred

I always loved that moronic invented claim.

 

[edthecynic]

First of all the Dems had a super majority in Congress.

For only a few months and NOT when the Bush tax cuts expired.
Try again.

 

[healthmyths]

And by "they" you mean BUSH and his appointees.

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.
View attachment 202407

I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

Could have... but again... you seem to totally discount ALL the events as described below.
Did you ever consider that GWB's purpose was to KEEP the economy going IN spite of all the events that killed nearly 5,000 people, cost nearly $20 Trillion in market, real estate,
jobs, and most importantly kept Americans from going off the deep end when somethings as traumatic as 9/11, hurricanes, dot.com bust, anthrax attacks and THEN
the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred as well as liberating Iraq IN SPITE of traitors in the USA MSM and idiots that didn't seem to comprehend
that the 1991 War was never ended! No peace treaty signed with Saddam. And GWB was doing what Clinton signed in 1998 the Liberation of Iraq.
Today Iraq have 15 years of all the unrest that started with Saddam not giving a crap about half a million kids, the Mesopotamia destruction and 100,000s of Kurds he gassed..
wouldn't sign the simple I don't have WMDs.
After 15 years guess what: GDP per person $17,000 in 2017 versus Under Saddam Per person GDP when Saddam was removed in 2003 per capita GDP never rose above $637
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency

So you may say what the hell does all the above have to do with Fannie/Freddie housing bubble?

Well you tell me if YOU could have handle all the below events, while at the same time LIBERATING Iraq per the 1998 Liberation of Iraq and thus helping
the people gain 6,267% in GDP in 14 years?

Tell me what YOU'D done differently?
View attachment 202426

and THEN the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred

I always loved that moronic invented claim.

By the morning of September 18, money market sell orders from institutional investors totalled $0.5 trillion, out of a total market capitalization of $4 trillion, but a $105 billion liquidity injection from the Federal Reserve averted an immediate collapse.[22][23] On September 19 the U.S. Treasury offered temporary insurance (akin to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance of bank accounts) to money market funds.[24] Toward the end of the week, short selling of financial stocks was suspended by the Financial Services Authority in the United Kingdom and by the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States.[25] Similar measures were taken by authorities in other countries.[26] Some restoration of market confidence occurred with the publicity surrounding efforts of the Treasury and the Securities Exchange Commission[27][28]

Global financial crisis in September 2008 - Wikipedia

Each day, we will recap the events of the corresponding day in 2008, as the worst crisis in 80 years built to its terrible climax.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/09182008tdich.pdf

So you claim it was INVENTED???? Wow what a brilliant Bernard Baruch type you are! Wow "invented" after people probably 100 times worth more than you and easily smarter than you stat it was the worst crisis in 80 years....
But of course YOU know so much!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yup.
Bush goosed the mandate from 50% to 55%.

Bastard!!!

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.
View attachment 202407

I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

Could have... but again... you seem to totally discount ALL the events as described below.
Did you ever consider that GWB's purpose was to KEEP the economy going IN spite of all the events that killed nearly 5,000 people, cost nearly $20 Trillion in market, real estate,
jobs, and most importantly kept Americans from going off the deep end when somethings as traumatic as 9/11, hurricanes, dot.com bust, anthrax attacks and THEN
the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred as well as liberating Iraq IN SPITE of traitors in the USA MSM and idiots that didn't seem to comprehend
that the 1991 War was never ended! No peace treaty signed with Saddam. And GWB was doing what Clinton signed in 1998 the Liberation of Iraq.
Today Iraq have 15 years of all the unrest that started with Saddam not giving a crap about half a million kids, the Mesopotamia destruction and 100,000s of Kurds he gassed..
wouldn't sign the simple I don't have WMDs.
After 15 years guess what: GDP per person $17,000 in 2017 versus Under Saddam Per person GDP when Saddam was removed in 2003 per capita GDP never rose above $637
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency

So you may say what the hell does all the above have to do with Fannie/Freddie housing bubble?

Well you tell me if YOU could have handle all the below events, while at the same time LIBERATING Iraq per the 1998 Liberation of Iraq and thus helping
the people gain 6,267% in GDP in 14 years?

Tell me what YOU'D done differently?
View attachment 202426

and THEN the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred

I always loved that moronic invented claim.

By the morning of September 18, money market sell orders from institutional investors totalled $0.5 trillion, out of a total market capitalization of $4 trillion, but a $105 billion liquidity injection from the Federal Reserve averted an immediate collapse.[22][23] On September 19 the U.S. Treasury offered temporary insurance (akin to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance of bank accounts) to money market funds.[24] Toward the end of the week, short selling of financial stocks was suspended by the Financial Services Authority in the United Kingdom and by the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States.[25] Similar measures were taken by authorities in other countries.[26] Some restoration of market confidence occurred with the publicity surrounding efforts of the Treasury and the Securities Exchange Commission[27][28]

Global financial crisis in September 2008 - Wikipedia

Each day, we will recap the events of the corresponding day in 2008, as the worst crisis in 80 years built to its terrible climax.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/09182008tdich.pdf

So you claim it was INVENTED???? Wow what a brilliant Bernard Baruch type you are! Wow "invented" after people probably 100 times worth more than you and easily smarter than you stat it was the worst crisis in 80 years....
But of course YOU know so much!

By the morning of September 18, money market sell orders from institutional investors totalled $0.5 trillion,

How does Kanjorski know that?




So you claim it was INVENTED????

Yes.

it was the worst crisis in 80 years....

It was. Even without the invented claims by politicians.

 

[healthmyths]

Really a dumb shit letting things go like 5% mandate!
I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.
View attachment 202407

I don't think though that GWB really had the time or inclination to pay attention as oh these other issues seem to require more immediate attention.

He did, he took Clinton's bad idea and made it even worse.

Could have... but again... you seem to totally discount ALL the events as described below.
Did you ever consider that GWB's purpose was to KEEP the economy going IN spite of all the events that killed nearly 5,000 people, cost nearly $20 Trillion in market, real estate,
jobs, and most importantly kept Americans from going off the deep end when somethings as traumatic as 9/11, hurricanes, dot.com bust, anthrax attacks and THEN
the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred as well as liberating Iraq IN SPITE of traitors in the USA MSM and idiots that didn't seem to comprehend
that the 1991 War was never ended! No peace treaty signed with Saddam. And GWB was doing what Clinton signed in 1998 the Liberation of Iraq.
Today Iraq have 15 years of all the unrest that started with Saddam not giving a crap about half a million kids, the Mesopotamia destruction and 100,000s of Kurds he gassed..
wouldn't sign the simple I don't have WMDs.
After 15 years guess what: GDP per person $17,000 in 2017 versus Under Saddam Per person GDP when Saddam was removed in 2003 per capita GDP never rose above $637
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency

So you may say what the hell does all the above have to do with Fannie/Freddie housing bubble?

Well you tell me if YOU could have handle all the below events, while at the same time LIBERATING Iraq per the 1998 Liberation of Iraq and thus helping
the people gain 6,267% in GDP in 14 years?

Tell me what YOU'D done differently?
View attachment 202426

and THEN the 2 hour withdrawal of over a half a trillion dollars on 9/18/08 occurred

I always loved that moronic invented claim.

By the morning of September 18, money market sell orders from institutional investors totalled $0.5 trillion, out of a total market capitalization of $4 trillion, but a $105 billion liquidity injection from the Federal Reserve averted an immediate collapse.[22][23] On September 19 the U.S. Treasury offered temporary insurance (akin to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance of bank accounts) to money market funds.[24] Toward the end of the week, short selling of financial stocks was suspended by the Financial Services Authority in the United Kingdom and by the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States.[25] Similar measures were taken by authorities in other countries.[26] Some restoration of market confidence occurred with the publicity surrounding efforts of the Treasury and the Securities Exchange Commission[27][28]

Global financial crisis in September 2008 - Wikipedia

Each day, we will recap the events of the corresponding day in 2008, as the worst crisis in 80 years built to its terrible climax.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/09182008tdich.pdf

So you claim it was INVENTED???? Wow what a brilliant Bernard Baruch type you are! Wow "invented" after people probably 100 times worth more than you and easily smarter than you stat it was the worst crisis in 80 years....
But of course YOU know so much!

By the morning of September 18, money market sell orders from institutional investors totalled $0.5 trillion,

How does Kanjorski know that?




So you claim it was INVENTED????

Yes.

it was the worst crisis in 80 years....

It was. Even without the invented claims by politicians.

So there never WAS a crisis but it was an invention of corporations, is that what you are saying? And that while the withdrawal of $0.5 Trillion was real, there
was NO need for it as it was an INVENTION by those evil corporations, stock managers, etc. Right?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Um no. Despite record profits, wages are way behind on inflation. It’s been like this for decades.

That's really strange because here is a chart I made and note the statistic I provided that shows that the "median wage".. has increased 5% a year for the past 26 years.
Source: Average wages, median wages, and wage dispersion
View attachment 202090

I never said wages hadn’t gone up, doofus. I said they are way behind on inflation. The rate of increase doesn’t even come close as catching up.

I never said wages hadn’t gone up, doofus. I said they are way behind on inflation.

You lie.

You are calling me a liar... yet you have NO proof for what you said.

I on the other hand CHECKED before I wrote a comment: Average Annual Inflation Rate by Decade

Wages "way behind"....
Let's see... 26 year from 2018 would be...hmmm 1990...
Decade 1990 to 1999.... Inflation was 3.08%
Decade 2000 to 2009...hmmm 2.54%...hmmm
decade 2010 to 2015 ...1.8%
See any decade at 5%????
Now nowhere in the past 26 years has inflation been greater than 5% which is what my statement from the Average wages, median wages, and wage dispersion stated.
WHERE is YOUR proof?

I just wish you'd put some little energy in validating your comments... save me a lot of time in having to PROVE YOU WRONG!! AGAIN. AND AGAIN!!!

View attachment 202106

If the US minimum wage had kept up with the economy, many low-wage earners could earn double what they're making now

If the minimum wage was kept up with inflation, it would be double what it is now.

For most workers, real wages have barely budged for decades | Pew Research Center

“But after adjusting for inflation, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power as it did in 1979, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms the average wage peaked more than 40 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 has the same purchasing power as $22.41 would today.”

That's just playing numbers and making 20 cents a week in 1792 is worth $30 bucks an hour today..

 

[Deno]

Corporations are already wealthier than ever before. There is no incentive for these corporations to invest in labor when it is just easier to save money on tax cuts. Meanwhile, the deficit explodes and only executives benefit.

Even if corporate profits weren’t at an all time high, there is still a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit. How, in part, do you maximize profit? By not investing in labor and accepting the economy as is. Right now, higher wage jobs are extremely competitive among workers while lower income jobs fill quite easily.

Lower wage workers are at the mercy of the economy. While it may be easy for republicans to call them lazy, it ignores the complexity of what creates poverty. Low wage workers do not have the time or money to spend on education that would make them qualified for skilled jobs. Of course, let’s pretend ALL workers did this. Who would be left behind to fill those entry level jobs that keep any business afloat?

You are so full of shit...

 

[Billy000]

Corporations are already wealthier than ever before. There is no incentive for these corporations to invest in labor when it is just easier to save money on tax cuts. Meanwhile, the deficit explodes and only executives benefit.

Even if corporate profits weren’t at an all time high, there is still a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit. How, in part, do you maximize profit? By not investing in labor and accepting the economy as is. Right now, higher wage jobs are extremely competitive among workers while lower income jobs fill quite easily.

Lower wage workers are at the mercy of the economy. While it may be easy for republicans to call them lazy, it ignores the complexity of what creates poverty. Low wage workers do not have the time or money to spend on education that would make them qualified for skilled jobs. Of course, let’s pretend ALL workers did this. Who would be left behind to fill those entry level jobs that keep any business afloat?

You are so full of shit...

Nah you just can’t explain how I am wrong.

 

[Deno]

Corporations are already wealthier than ever before. There is no incentive for these corporations to invest in labor when it is just easier to save money on tax cuts. Meanwhile, the deficit explodes and only executives benefit.

Even if corporate profits weren’t at an all time high, there is still a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit. How, in part, do you maximize profit? By not investing in labor and accepting the economy as is. Right now, higher wage jobs are extremely competitive among workers while lower income jobs fill quite easily.

Lower wage workers are at the mercy of the economy. While it may be easy for republicans to call them lazy, it ignores the complexity of what creates poverty. Low wage workers do not have the time or money to spend on education that would make them qualified for skilled jobs. Of course, let’s pretend ALL workers did this. Who would be left behind to fill those entry level jobs that keep any business afloat?

You are so full of shit...

Nah you just can’t explain how I am wrong.

Sure I can...

But we both know you are too ate up with dumb ass to get it….