Liz Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

[Toro]

The melt down was caused by lenders being forced by the government to loan money to people who could never pay it back. Nice try at revisionism.

False.

24 of the 25 top subprime lenders had no CRA mandate, and the GSEs were losing share in subprime until the very last year of the Financial Crisis.

 

[Mac1958]

[That's just silly. If we don't get past shallow, binary thinking, we'll be asking for a huge pushback in the opposite direction.

Efficient, effective regulation is key for healthy capitalism. When it's lacking, we see the growing distortions and inequities that we're seeing.
.
.

We already have a plethora of regulation on every facet of Capitalism to the point where we can't even call it capitalism. What more Government regulation do you want to install? Effective, and efficient Regulation is more an OXYMORON than Jumbo Shrimp.

Have you ever run a business?

Well yes, I'm a partner in a firm now, have +/- 95 business clients, and have written three books and +/- 30 magazine articles on the topic.

My guess is you're just spouting off talk radio talking points. "We can't even call it capitalism". Silly, shallow hyperbole. I very much doubt you understand the details of the Meltdown, outside of "it was all the Democrats' fault".

Maybe you should try this crap on someone else.
.

 

[Mac1958]

The melt down was caused by lenders being forced by the government to loan money to people who could never pay it back. Nice try at revisionism.

False.

24 of the 25 top subprime lenders had no CRA mandate, and the GSEs were losing share in subprime until the very last year of the Financial Crisis.

Hey, you're messing with their reality.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Cutting business regulation and encouraging economic growth. I haven't heard anything from democrats except actually calling people Nazi's and Hitler

The thread in which you're posting is something. Perhaps you can provide a thoughtful and reasonable response.

The Meltdown of 2008 was in many ways the result of a lack of regulation. I'll be more than happy to go into detail, such as Alan Greenspan's abject refusal to regulate derivatives (begged for by CLTC Chair Brooksley Born), the complete lack of reserve requirements for credit default swaps, the fact that ratings agencies got away with selling AAA (Treasury-level) ratings for shit-filled CMOs and CDOs, zero regulation on the makeup or opacity of these shit securities, John Paulsen being free to create CDOs that were specifically created to fail so that he could short them (with the help of Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and others), Morgan Stanley and GS being free to short shit securities at the same time they were selling them, banks leveraging up to a stratospheric 30:1 and higher, and more.

Just ask.
.

The melt down was caused by lenders being forced by the government to loan money to people who could never pay it back. Nice try at revisionism.

I just provided seven (7) specific elements of the Meltdown.

You addressed none of them, because talk radio won't cover them.

You don't know what you're talking about.
.

 

[task0778]

Of course you can regulate and change the behaviors and capacities in the financial services industry. I'm in it.

All of the things I listed could have been avoided with proper, flexible regulation. Not terribly tough.
.

If your response is, the government didn't do what it was supposed to, to stop what it knew was going on, that's not going to help your case. In fact, it says more about the people in the industry that knew what was going on and didn't do anything about it. If you want to claim you are in the industry and knew how to fix it, and didn't do what was necessary to accomplish that, then I really don't give a damn about your excuses.

You cannot claim ignorance and competence at the same time. If you weren't ignorant of what was happening, you were incompetent at protecting the interests of the investors.

In fact, it says more about the people in the industry that knew what was going on and didn't do anything about it. If you want to claim you are in the industry and knew how to fix it, and didn't do what was necessary to accomplish that

Not at all, businesses exist to make money according to whatever the laws or regs are. It's not their responsibility to solve anything, that's totally on the gov't. It is also the responsibility of the media/press to identify and publicize what's going on and create public scrutiny on whatever the issue is. You should not be blaming private enterprise for the failures of gov't and/or the media.

 

[Tehon]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

They are also the result of capital. No capital, no advances.

BTW, I'm not sure if Lincoln was right or wrong, in his day maybe you didn't need much capital. But you sure as hell do today, times have changed in 150+ years.

No human labor, no advances. Capital accelerates the process, without question, but it is not indispensable.

 

[westwall]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

How can you claim he is factually wrong when the theory you are promulgating has no meaningful methods of measurement? Assigning Capital .3 as opposed to labor at .7 seems arbitrary at best. Without the Capital investment there IS no labor. Furthermore, as technology increases it is becoming ever more apparent that in many cases labor is a net negative. Automation is going to put most "laborers" out of work. Permanently. That is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, but these economic theories with no factual data to support them are not helping matters.

 

[westwall]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

They are also the result of capital. No capital, no advances.

BTW, I'm not sure if Lincoln was right or wrong, in his day maybe you didn't need much capital. But you sure as hell do today, times have changed in 150+ years.

No human labor, no advances. Capital accelerates the process, without question, but it is not indispensable.

Within ten years you will probably be mostly incorrect.

 

[westwall]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

No, they are not. They are the result of human THINKING.

 

[Pilot1]

[
Well yes, I'm a partner in a firm now, have +/- 95 business clients, and have written three books and +/- 30 magazine articles on the topic.

My guess is you're just spouting off talk radio talking points. "We can't even call it capitalism". Silly, shallow hyperbole. I very much doubt you understand the details of the Meltdown, outside of "it was all the Democrats' fault".

Maybe you should try this crap on someone else.
.

Not crapping on anyone, just calling you out for your "efficient regulation" B.S. If you are in business you know the huge amount of regulation already in place, much of it ineffective, and inefficient which makes business difficult, cumbersome, and more costly than it should be.

More government regulation as you want is NOT the answer. BTW, I don't listen to much talk radio, nor watch Fox News, so don't get many talking points. I do have thirty five years experience running companies though.

 

[Mac1958]

[
Well yes, I'm a partner in a firm now, have +/- 95 business clients, and have written three books and +/- 30 magazine articles on the topic.

My guess is you're just spouting off talk radio talking points. "We can't even call it capitalism". Silly, shallow hyperbole. I very much doubt you understand the details of the Meltdown, outside of "it was all the Democrats' fault".

Maybe you should try this crap on someone else.
.

Not crapping on anyone, just calling you out for your "efficient regulation" B.S. If you are in business you know the huge amount of regulation already in place, much of it ineffective, and inefficient which makes business difficult, cumbersome, and more costly than it should be.

More government regulation as you want is NOT the answer. BTW, I don't listen to much talk radio, nor watch Fox News, so don't get many talking points. I do have thirty five years experience running companies though.

The Democrats don't understand the difference between MORE regulation and BETTER regulation. I'm by no means saying more is better.

That's why I use the term "efficient". There are still LARGE holes, and there is still wasteful regulation. Since the two parties are unwilling to work together to address that, dangers remain.
.

 

[Tehon]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

No, they are not. They are the result of human THINKING.

And how are those thoughts applied?

 

[Toro]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

How can you claim he is factually wrong when the theory you are promulgating has no meaningful methods of measurement? Assigning Capital .3 as opposed to labor at .7 seems arbitrary at best. Without the Capital investment there IS no labor. Furthermore, as technology increases it is becoming ever more apparent that in many cases labor is a net negative. Automation is going to put most "laborers" out of work. Permanently. That is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, but these economic theories with no factual data to support them are not helping matters.

I was demonstrating to Tehron that his claim that the only means which human improve upon nature is labor was false. Whether or not the factor assigned to capital is 0.3, 0.4, 0.9 or whatever is not relevant to the argument that only labor matters. What is relevant is that it is greater than 0.

 

[Toro]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

Of course they are.

But it is factually wrong to say that only human labor matters.

How do you fund that technological and scientific advances? Where does it take place? What are the machines that are used to test and produce the advances? Those are all from capital.

 

[Toro]

The Democrats don't understand the difference between MORE regulation and BETTER regulation. I'm by no means saying more is better.

That's why I use the term "efficient". There are still LARGE holes, and there is still wasteful regulation. Since the two parties are unwilling to work together to address that, dangers remain.
.

We have gotten to the point where incremental regulations are slowing growth.

Trump is a douche, but the single best thing he has done IMO is to require two regulations to be removed for every one that goes on the books. That's not the most efficient way to construct a regulatory regime, but the direction is correct.

 

[Tehon]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

Of course they are.

But it is factually wrong to say that only human labor matters.

How do you fund that technological and scientific advances? Where does it take place? What are the machines that are used to test and produce the advances? Those are all from capital.

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

 

[westwall]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

Of course they are.

But it is factually wrong to say that only human labor matters.

How do you fund that technological and scientific advances? Where does it take place? What are the machines that are used to test and produce the advances? Those are all from capital.

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

Wrong. Currently you need very few people to operate the machines that are required to build other machines. But those days are coming to an end. When I was a younger man a Tool and Die maker was a profession to aspire to. If you earned that appelation you were set. Any job was open to you. Now, you will be hard pressed to find a T&D in any manufacturing plant. They have been supplanted by CNC machines. Now, you just need a programmer to do the work that used to require dozens of people to do.

 

[Tehon]

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

Of course they are.

But it is factually wrong to say that only human labor matters.

How do you fund that technological and scientific advances? Where does it take place? What are the machines that are used to test and produce the advances? Those are all from capital.

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

Wrong. Currently you need very few people to operate the machines that are required to build other machines. But those days are coming to an end. When I was a younger man a Tool and Die maker was a profession to aspire to. If you earned that appelation you were set. Any job was open to you. Now, you will be hard pressed to find a T&D in any manufacturing plant. They have been supplanted by CNC machines. Now, you just need a programmer to do the work that used to require dozens of people to do.

The CNC machine was built with human labor. The person with the know how to run the CNC machine is part of the labor process. All the technology that went into the entire process was produced by human labor. Capital doesn't magically transform nature into a CNC machine that runs itself.

 

[westwall]

This is factually wrong.

Total factor productivity - Wikipedia

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

Of course they are.

But it is factually wrong to say that only human labor matters.

How do you fund that technological and scientific advances? Where does it take place? What are the machines that are used to test and produce the advances? Those are all from capital.

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

Wrong. Currently you need very few people to operate the machines that are required to build other machines. But those days are coming to an end. When I was a younger man a Tool and Die maker was a profession to aspire to. If you earned that appelation you were set. Any job was open to you. Now, you will be hard pressed to find a T&D in any manufacturing plant. They have been supplanted by CNC machines. Now, you just need a programmer to do the work that used to require dozens of people to do.

The CNC machine was built with human labor. The person with the know how to run the CNC machine is part of the labor process. All the technology that went into the entire process was produced by human labor. Capital doesn't magically transform nature into a CNC machine that runs itself.

Indeed it was. And that labor is now obsolete. What do you do with labor that is not needed? You focus on that which is instantly replaceable, and if untrained, is nearly worthless. Labor is meaningless without the Capital to provide it projects to do. And, as labor decides it is entitled to things that it has not trained itself sufficiently for, automation becomes the go to solution to get rid of useless laborers.

 

[Tehon]

Technological and scientific advances are not the result of human labor?

Of course they are.

But it is factually wrong to say that only human labor matters.

How do you fund that technological and scientific advances? Where does it take place? What are the machines that are used to test and produce the advances? Those are all from capital.

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

Wrong. Currently you need very few people to operate the machines that are required to build other machines. But those days are coming to an end. When I was a younger man a Tool and Die maker was a profession to aspire to. If you earned that appelation you were set. Any job was open to you. Now, you will be hard pressed to find a T&D in any manufacturing plant. They have been supplanted by CNC machines. Now, you just need a programmer to do the work that used to require dozens of people to do.

The CNC machine was built with human labor. The person with the know how to run the CNC machine is part of the labor process. All the technology that went into the entire process was produced by human labor. Capital doesn't magically transform nature into a CNC machine that runs itself.

Indeed it was. And that labor is now obsolete. What do you do with labor that is not needed? You focus on that which is instantly replaceable, and if untrained, is nearly worthless. Labor is meaningless without the Capital to provide it projects to do. And, as labor decides it is entitled to things that it has not trained itself sufficiently for, automation becomes the go to solution to get rid of useless laborers.

I don't even know why you are arguing with me, I already acknowledged, in this very thread, capitals dominant role in a capitalist society.

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature and therefore deserves the higher rank. But we live in a capitalist world and in such a world labor is reduced to a commodity meant to be bought and sold and thus becomes subservient to capital.