Economics 101

[P@triot]

This should be a mandatory class for every liberal in America. There is not one thing here in the video that could even be remotely disputed. Not one.

Milton Friedman Part I: Economics 101

 

[Indeependent]

This should be a mandatory class for every liberal in America. There is not one thing here in the video that could even be remotely disputed. Not one.

Milton Friedman Part I: Economics 101

Which has led to how many Stock Markets crashes?
Too many.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This should be a mandatory class for every liberal in America. There is not one thing here in the video that could even be remotely disputed. Not one.

Milton Friedman Part I: Economics 101

Which has led to how many Stock Markets crashes?
Too many.

actually crashes:
1) have mostly been caused by govt interference in economy

2) were easily avoided simply by not selling during the crash

 

[P@triot]

This should be a mandatory class for every liberal in America. There is not one thing here in the video that could even be remotely disputed. Not one.

Milton Friedman Part I: Economics 101

Which has led to how many Stock Markets crashes?
Too many.

Any "stock market crash" experienced was exponentially less devastating than the permanent crashes that left-wing policy caused in the former U.S.S.R., Cuba, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Vietnam, etc.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This should be a mandatory class for every liberal in America. There is not one thing here in the video that could even be remotely disputed. Not one.

Milton Friedman Part I: Economics 101

Which has led to how many Stock Markets crashes?
Too many.

^ Moron

 

[eagle1462010]

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

..........Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......
.

1) a far far better idea than letting a soviet bureaucracy own and run the banks
2) self regulation worked fine, massive govt interference in the economy didn't

 

[eagle1462010]

..........Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......
.

1) a far far better idea than letting a soviet bureaucracy own and run the banks
2) self regulation worked fine, massive govt interference in the economy didn't

Worked so well they had to be saved right.....................Nice back door the Federal Reserve has there.............It's a members only club though..................

I have some Real estate to sale you.........I've added perfume and wrapped it in a bow tie.......It's really nice..........do you want to buy it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Friedman should be give a lession in Econ 101 along with Keynes and Krugman, yeah.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Ive never lost money in a stock market crash but I was never in it for short term gain.I could afford to sit tight and sit out the storm. Those who lost money - I have no sympathy with. If they couldnt afford to lose it they were in the wrong game.

However I have seen my government step in to save several banks who we "couldnt allow to fail".

In a similar vein I have seen tax payers money prop up the motor industry because , once again, we " couldnt allow it to fail".

Having done so I rather think that I have a right to some say in how these corrupt people conduct their business. After all. I pick up the tab.

 

[P@triot]

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

Um....."too big to fail" is the result of left-wing government intervention, genius. True free-market would result in those banks, companies, etc. failing.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Self regulation never works. Banks and casinos should not operate under the same brand.

 

[eagle1462010]

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

Um....."too big to fail" is the result of left-wing government intervention, genius. True free-market would result in those banks, companies, etc. failing.

Both sides were in on the bailout......but the bailout was bogus anyway with the Federal Reserve Back door open.........If you are saying those that failed should have been put under......their assets seized............for losing in the Casino of Wall Street then I agree............

 

[HenryBHough]

Understand ONE thing and you need no more:

"When your outgo exceeds your income then your upkeep will be your downfall."

 

[P@triot]

..........Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......
.

1) a far far better idea than letting a soviet bureaucracy own and run the banks
2) self regulation worked fine, massive govt interference in the economy didn't

Worked so well they had to be saved right.....................Nice back door the Federal Reserve has there.............It's a members only club though..................

I have some Real estate to sale you.........I've added perfume and wrapped it in a bow tie.......It's really nice..........do you want to buy it.

Only a liberal could cite the failure of free-market capitalism but providing "evidence" of

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

Um....."too big to fail" is the result of left-wing government intervention, genius. True free-market would result in those banks, companies, etc. failing.

Both sides were in on the bailout......but the bailout was bogus anyway with the Federal Reserve Back door open.........If you are saying those that failed should have been put under......their assets seized............for losing in the Casino of Wall Street then I agree............

Yes....both sides were in on the bailout because both sides are now FULL left-wing policy supporters. Republican's are made up of Kennedy-era liberals and Democrats are made up of marxists/socialists/communists.

And YES....I'm absolutely saying that every bank, every auto manufacturer, etc. should have been left to fail and collapse. There is nothing dumber than propping up failure and that's exactly what the bailouts did.

 

[eagle1462010]

..........Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......
.

1) a far far better idea than letting a soviet bureaucracy own and run the banks
2) self regulation worked fine, massive govt interference in the economy didn't

Worked so well they had to be saved right.....................Nice back door the Federal Reserve has there.............It's a members only club though..................

I have some Real estate to sale you.........I've added perfume and wrapped it in a bow tie.......It's really nice..........do you want to buy it.

Only a liberal could cite the failure of free-market capitalism but providing "evidence" of

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

Um....."too big to fail" is the result of left-wing government intervention, genius. True free-market would result in those banks, companies, etc. failing.

Both sides were in on the bailout......but the bailout was bogus anyway with the Federal Reserve Back door open.........If you are saying those that failed should have been put under......their assets seized............for losing in the Casino of Wall Street then I agree............

Yes....both sides were in on the bailout because both sides are now FULL left-wing policy supporters. Republican's are made up of Kennedy-era liberals and Democrats are made up of marxists/socialists/communists.

And YES....I'm absolutely saying that every bank, every auto manufacturer, etc. should have been left to fail and collapse. There is nothing dumber than propping up failure and that's exactly what the bailouts did.

I would have seized their assets and put them out for the shit they pulled............They gambled and failed and should suffer a failures fate on the markets.........................

To the liberal comments..........I don't give a fuck what you want to call me................They put perfume on shit and nearly took our country down.............Hang them for all I care.

 

[P@triot]

..........Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......
.

1) a far far better idea than letting a soviet bureaucracy own and run the banks
2) self regulation worked fine, massive govt interference in the economy didn't

Worked so well they had to be saved right.....................Nice back door the Federal Reserve has there.............It's a members only club though..................

I have some Real estate to sale you.........I've added perfume and wrapped it in a bow tie.......It's really nice..........do you want to buy it.

Only a liberal could cite the failure of free-market capitalism but providing "evidence" of

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

Um....."too big to fail" is the result of left-wing government intervention, genius. True free-market would result in those banks, companies, etc. failing.

Both sides were in on the bailout......but the bailout was bogus anyway with the Federal Reserve Back door open.........If you are saying those that failed should have been put under......their assets seized............for losing in the Casino of Wall Street then I agree............

Yes....both sides were in on the bailout because both sides are now FULL left-wing policy supporters. Republican's are made up of Kennedy-era liberals and Democrats are made up of marxists/socialists/communists.

And YES....I'm absolutely saying that every bank, every auto manufacturer, etc. should have been left to fail and collapse. There is nothing dumber than propping up failure and that's exactly what the bailouts did.

I would have seized their assets and put them out for the shit they pulled............They gambled and failed and should suffer a failures fate on the markets.........................

To the liberal comments..........I don't give a fuck what you want to call me................They put perfume on shit and nearly took our country down.............Hang them for all I care.

But here is the problem - in all of your outrage and anger, you fail to reason why all of this happened. Every part of it was the result of left-wing government intervention policy.

It was Bill Clinton's illegal and asinine 1997 Community Re-Investment Act (which was originally done by Jimmy Carter) which incentivized banks to "gamble". When it's the bank's ass on the line for the loan, they refuse to take risk. But the Dumbocrats, in their infinite socialist stupidity believed that everyone should own a home, even if they couldn't afford it. So the Act incentivized banks to make risky loans and promised them that they weren't on the hook for the loans - the tax payer would be via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The banks, having no skin in the game, now started throwing money around wildly and irresponsibly.

It not only killed our economy, it also created the "housing bubble" as houses were bought and/or built for all of these people that couldn't afford it. Eventually many defaulted and the market became saturated with homes that banks were trying to get out from under with a fire sale. That caused all housing prices to plummet.

History has proven that liberal policy / government intervention has a failure rate of 100%.

 

[eagle1462010]

..........Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......
.

1) a far far better idea than letting a soviet bureaucracy own and run the banks
2) self regulation worked fine, massive govt interference in the economy didn't

Worked so well they had to be saved right.....................Nice back door the Federal Reserve has there.............It's a members only club though..................

I have some Real estate to sale you.........I've added perfume and wrapped it in a bow tie.......It's really nice..........do you want to buy it.

Only a liberal could cite the failure of free-market capitalism but providing "evidence" of

Why should I listen to these asses who helped crash our asses in 2008.............Yeah allowing the too big to fail to self regulate was such a great idea.......

As great as this.........I like to hit my head with a hammer because it feels so good when I stop.

Um....."too big to fail" is the result of left-wing government intervention, genius. True free-market would result in those banks, companies, etc. failing.

Both sides were in on the bailout......but the bailout was bogus anyway with the Federal Reserve Back door open.........If you are saying those that failed should have been put under......their assets seized............for losing in the Casino of Wall Street then I agree............

Yes....both sides were in on the bailout because both sides are now FULL left-wing policy supporters. Republican's are made up of Kennedy-era liberals and Democrats are made up of marxists/socialists/communists.

And YES....I'm absolutely saying that every bank, every auto manufacturer, etc. should have been left to fail and collapse. There is nothing dumber than propping up failure and that's exactly what the bailouts did.

I would have seized their assets and put them out for the shit they pulled............They gambled and failed and should suffer a failures fate on the markets.........................

To the liberal comments..........I don't give a fuck what you want to call me................They put perfume on shit and nearly took our country down.............Hang them for all I care.

But here is the problem - in all of your outrage and anger, you fail to reason why all of this happened. Every part of it was the result of left-wing government intervention policy.

It was Bill Clinton's illegal and asinine 1997 Community Re-Investment Act (which was originally done by Jimmy Carter) which incentivized banks to "gamble". When it's the bank's ass on the line for the loan, they refuse to take risk. But the Dumbocrats, in their infinite socialist stupidity believed that everyone should own a home, even if they couldn't afford it. So the Act incentivized banks to make risky loans and promised them that they weren't on the hook for the loans - the tax payer would be via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The banks, having no skin in the game, now started throwing money around wildly and irresponsibly.

It not only killed our economy, it also created the "housing bubble" as houses were bought and/or built for all of these people that couldn't afford it. Eventually many defaulted and the market became saturated with homes that banks were trying to get out from under with a fire sale. That caused all housing prices to plummet.

History has proven that liberal policy / government intervention has a failure rate of 100%.

Clinton signed it, and it was pushed for by the Republican party.............. both sides did the deal........and that signing allowed self regulation which proved to be a disaster.................

 

[Dovahkiin]

Oh, you mean this guy?
William Keegan: So now Friedman says he was wrong

The economic quote of the month - and probably the decade - is that Milton Friedman now admits: 'The use of quantity of money as a target has not been a success.' He added: 'I'm not sure I would as of today push it as hard as I once did.' (FT, 7 June 2003).

So there we are. It takes some digesting, not least because we have it from the horse's mouth.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Conservatives stop at Econ 101 when the real complex world requires you to go through Econ 201 through Econ 505 to fully understand it.

Taking a class that explains things with 'widgets' is a theory class, no application.