GaryPDX: Like I said, some unscrupulous businesses are nothing compared to what a corrupt government can do.

The government hasn't ever managed to wipe out billions in wealth in the blink of an eye. To say nothing of misrepresenting billions more. But I suppose you think it's worse for the government to tax someone then for a brokerage to cause billions in pension fund money to go poof due to their own stupidity.

Who's all tied up with Wall Street now..eh?

Irrelevant point, it's about who made the mess that matters.

legion_of_doo: it's easy to say that the banks were bad

The banks, and others, were knowingly derelict in their duties and responsibilities. They stick to how they're supposed to do things, and we don't have have such a big mess.

legion_of_doo: People who bought houses with no money are the ones most likely to default & re-default (there was an article in the NYT or WSJ a little while ago about 0% down/LTV ratio being far more correlated with default rates than "subprime" in general... don't have the link with me)... but of course, they are losing their homes, and they can't be blamed, or something.

And it's more complicated than irresponsible lending. For instance, the direct cause of IndyMac's failure was the liquidity crisis, which was certainly aided by non-performance in their loan portfolio... but it was not simply a factor of dhey maed badd loans & tuuk mah house frum meh!

Blaming banks for the EXTREME levels of liquidity in the market due to the rush into loan securitization internationally (not just us, but money came from EVERYWHERE)... there was so much cheap money coming in, it really helped stupid corp-serfs give it out to loser deadbeats.

BUT... it's easy to say that the banks were bad, and to write stupid shiat into law like limiting executive management from flying in private jets (look up some of the legislation from the time if you want to see those clauses. It's in the original TARP, along with a couple other bills I've read through).

It was just a complicated failure with a lot of moving parts that broke horribly & spectacularly. Don't take others off the hook by blaming dumbass bankster middlemen in this clusterfrak.

This is not a chicken-or-the-egg scenario.
Banks and real estate brokers would not have offered mortgages at insane rates and/or lied about the buyer's finances if mortgages had not first been pooled and sold as commodities on Wall Street.

PC LOAD LETTER: Nemo's Brother: Obama has either gone full retard, or he is a brilliant and wants American to fall.

Remember Descent:

The highest form of patriotic.

This brings up an interesting question. Why should we have to wait for things to get better? Nobody wanted to wait for any war to get better. They wanted it all fixed, right now.

FIX IT NOW OH FEARLESS LEADER!

/gonna go drink kool aid to drown my sorrows
//beer isn't working anymore

Thunderpipes: "Obama will save us!"

I'd offer some solutions, but you'd cry about those too, even though it would only involve going after people who farked things up. Granted perhaps a bit harshly, but they earned it.

Andyr2120: Nemo's Brother: Obama has either gone full retard, or he is a brilliant and wants American to fall.

I've been reading Fark for years, and I have been a TF member for the last 2-3 years. This is the first dipshiat I've ever added to my ignore list.

coward

Mr. Right: FDR tried to manage the economy. Dismal economy.
Truman didn't know how to manage the economy. Successful economy.
Eisenhower didn't try to manage the economy. Successful economy.
Kennedy cut taxes and let the economy go. Successful economy.
LBJ tried to manage the economy. Dismal economy.
Nixon tried to manage the economy. Dismal economy.
Carter tried to manage the economy. Dismal economy.
Reagan cut taxes and let the economy go. Successful economy.
Bush I wanted to manage the economy through taxation. Dismal economy.
Clinton did almost nothing to change the Reagan model after the failure of Hillary Care. Successful economy.
Bush II let the economy go. Successful economy.
Bush II after 2006 tried to manage the economy. Dismal economy.

See the pattern yet?

Obama is trying to manage the economy. He will fail.

And how the U.S. economy did during those presidencies was solely due to the president at the time either "managing" the economy or "letting the economy go"? The oversimplification meter just asploded, Tsar Bomba-style.

Here's a good one for ya:

Herbert Hoover. Let the economy do its thing. Disastrous economy.

/Hey, this is fun!

dustman81: Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator.

The jobs wouldn't magically appear as soon as Obama finished signing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). The money is starting to flow, but it does take time. Agencies are starting to get the money and are bidding projects and hiring workers.

Unfortunately, Americans want everything fixed right now and don't understand the concept of patience.


YOU. CANT. FLOOD. THE. MARKET. WITH. FIAT. CURRENCY. and expect things to get better.

It might look like things are getting better for your 24-hour news cycle, but over a period of years its just not going to happen.


Seriously, I don't know. It it Full Retard or brilliant and wants American to fall.

If I had to pick. It would be Full Retard and wants America to fail.

Doctor Funkenstein:

Someone should really 'shop palin in place of the baby. That'd be hilarious..

Klingon Penis: Mr. Right: Hoover signing the Smoot-Hawley act (tariffs) were the single most devastting act leading to the Great Depression. I'm not all hot about Global Commerce but excessive tariffs invite retaliation which stops all trade and all business.

Hoover, Smoot, and Hawley: Republicans, all.

What's your point? FDR and the Dems supported it - Dems were clamoring for it! Stupidity is not a party thing. It's a politician thing. Both Dems and Reps have screwed up the economy when they tried to manage it. Both Dems and Reps have had successful economies when they let it go and let the people run it in their own self-interest. The economy is not a party thing. It's a people vs. government thing. The government needs to get the hell out of the way and watch us go. Right now, they have jackboots on our necks.

elchip: Mr. Right: Hoover signing the Smoot-Hawley act (tariffs) were the single most devastting act leading to the Great Depression. I'm not all hot about Global Commerce but excessive tariffs invite retaliation which stops all trade and all business. The greatest thing the government could do to improve the manufacturing climate in this country would be to ease up on the onerous regulations that inhibit every facet of business.

Our great nation was founded on tariffs and protectionism.

Hey, elchip! Good to see you here!

(waves)

Klingon Penis:
This is not a chicken-or-the-egg scenario.
Banks and real estate brokers would not have offered mortgages at insane rates and/or lied about the buyer's finances if mortgages had not first been pooled and sold as commodities on Wall Street the loans had not had implicit backing from the Federal Government.


FTFY.

Terryg999: dustman81: Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator. Unemployment is a lagging economic indicator.

The jobs wouldn't magically appear as soon as Obama finished signing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). The money is starting to flow, but it does take time. Agencies are starting to get the money and are bidding projects and hiring workers.

Unfortunately, Americans want everything fixed right now and don't understand the concept of patience.


YOU. CANT. FLOOD. THE. MARKET. WITH. FIAT. CURRENCY. and expect things to get better.

It might look like things are getting better for your 24-hour news cycle, but over a period of years its just not going to happen.


Seriously, I don't know. It it Full Retard or brilliant and wants American to fall.

If I had to pick. It would be Full Retard and wants America to fail.

Ah yes,,, a currency flood. That would explain the massive inflation we're having... oh wait, we're deflating/neutral

WhyteRaven74: Irrelevant point, it's about who made the mess that matters.

Wrong. The relevant point is you can't eliminate greed. Some greed in businesses is far better than widespread greed in corrupt government. To believe these clowns in DC are benevolent and only looking out for the little guy is pure fantasy.

Mr. Right: What's your point? FDR and the Dems supported it - Dems were clamoring for it! Stupidity is not a party thing. It's a politician thing. Both Dems and Reps have screwed up the economy when they tried to manage it. Both Dems and Reps have had successful economies when they let it go and let the people run it in their own self-interest. The economy is not a party thing. It's a people vs. government thing. The government needs to get the hell out of the way and watch us go. Right now, they have jackboots on our necks.

"Everybody has asked the question, what shall we do...? I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!" - Frederick Douglas

The man was ahead of his time.

"The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man[...]"

/I think Davie Crockett understood.

I can't afford to be patient when I have no job and no money.

Klingon Penis: Banks and real estate brokers would not have offered mortgages at insane rates and/or lied about the buyer's finances if mortgages had not first been pooled and sold as commodities on Wall Street.

And there's the tiny issue of getting the ratings agencies to issue favorable ratings. Ratings that no sane person would ever offer to the securities in question.

Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: Mr. Right: What's your point? FDR and the Dems supported it - Dems were clamoring for it! Stupidity is not a party thing. It's a politician thing. Both Dems and Reps have screwed up the economy when they tried to manage it. Both Dems and Reps have had successful economies when they let it go and let the people run it in their own self-interest. The economy is not a party thing. It's a people vs. government thing. The government needs to get the hell out of the way and watch us go. Right now, they have jackboots on our necks.

"Everybody has asked the question, what shall we do...? I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!" - Frederick Douglas

The man was ahead of his time.

Said a man whose people we're kept in chains for an economic incentive.

yelmrog:
Here's a good one for ya:

Herbert Hoover. Let the economy do its thing. Disastrous economy.

/Hey, this is fun!

Wrong. Hoover had a chance to let the economy fix itself. He failed. See Smoot-Hawley. That is what is called managing the economy. It failed.

One similarity though. Through his third election, FDR was blaming Hoover for the economy. Just like Obama and his minions blame Bush for every thing now and will likely continue to through his 2nd term, if we are so misfortunate as to have to endure that.

WhyteRaven74: GaryPDX: Like I said, some unscrupulous businesses are nothing compared to what a corrupt government can do.

The government hasn't ever managed to wipe out billions in wealth in the blink of an eye.

The government was absolutely complicit in allowing it to happen. Many checks and balances were in place to prevent the meltdown and the government decided the banks / stock market didn't need any checks/balances and could basically oversee their own banking/stock trading practices.

Read up on Chris Cox if you're bored.

Once upon a time there was a country having hard times.With a new leader, the government created jobs and took over banking and industry.Sound familiar?

communistsarestupid: FTFY.

A lot of mortgages have no government backing at all.

GaryPDX: Some greed in businesses is far better than widespread greed in corrupt government

So greed that wipes out tens of billions in wealth is acceptable? Really?

elchip
Unfortunately I think it's a little late to start thinking about tariffs. It would probably provoke a trade war with China and they would dump all the government bonds they hold. Unless you're considering that to be an acceptable outcome.

i warned you what would happen if the US did not convert to the metric system



but did u listen?

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

StickyBunBandit: Once upon a time there was a country having hard times.With a new leader, the government created jobs and took over banking and industry.Sound familiar?

Sweden?
Japan?
Ghana?

Chelsea Clinton Is Carrot Top's Lost Twin: The government was absolutely complicit in allowing it to happen

It didn't help the relevant offices were basically told to do nothing. The SEC barely had enough people to keep track of regular filings, forget trying to chase after people.

StickyBunBandit: Once upon a time there was a country having hard times.With a new leader, the government created jobs and took over banking and industry.Sound familiar?

Sweden?

clgrin: Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: Mr. Right:
"Everybody has asked the question, what shall we do...? I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!" - Frederick Douglas

The man was ahead of his time.

Said a man whose people we're kept in chains for an economic incentive.

The problem is that the economic incentive didn't work. The slave economy in the South was in abysmal shape at the time of the Civil War. The economy of the North was booming. Free enterprise and all that. But Douglass was a brilliant man. Up from slavery, yet he did indeed hit the nail on the head. Leave us alone and we succeed. Help us and do us the more mischief.

/I love the turn of phrase that Douglass was capable of. Apparently even the uneducated had more grammar skills in those days.

Deacon Blue: The United States is heading towards socialism, for good or bad, and it doesn't matter which party is in power. Government, like any coorperation, acts kind of like a living creature in that it seeks to live, grow, and protect itself from external threats. Maybe Republicans are taking us towards greater 'collectivism' slower and more gradually than Democrats, but they sure as hell aren't moving in the other direction. I don't know how it's all going to work out, whether things 20 years from now will be better or worse than they are now.

So, if you agree with me on this, how about we stop with the vitriolic hate in political threads. We get along pretty well when the article is about Paris Hilton or the Large Hadron Collider. Those threads are fun and snarky, and nobody threatens to castrate anyone, it's all just rapier wit and astute observations. But bring politics into it, and we're at each other't throats, even though it doesn't make a hill of beans difference who's in the White House, or who controls congress

People get a little touchy when it comes to their individual liberties and property, who knew?

There is an alternative. Everyone who values liberty and personal responsibility can move to New Hampshire for the Free State Project. Everybody else can stay in the other states and keep circling the drain with failed policies and leviathan government that is intent on redistributing wealth and running every minute aspect of their lives. That will make both sides happy. Or at least it will make one side happy, and the other side scared and angry about what's happening to them but unwilling to do anything to actually change it.

GaryPDX: WhyteRaven74: Irrelevant point, it's about who made the mess that matters.

Wrong. The relevant point is you can't eliminate greed. Some greed in businesses is far better than widespread greed in corrupt government. To believe these clowns in DC are benevolent and only looking out for the little guy is pure fantasy.

I can only speak for our family. when gas prices sky rocketed and intrest rates went just as high ..we went from a 6% intrest rate to 15% in one month.. We are not spending one dime on anything we don't need . we are dumping all our extra cash into paying off our debt.while will take a year. I am sure we aren't the only one doing this.And we are holding our breathes to see how bad our congress is going to screw us more. taxing cigs..sodas..gas. like we really need this now.
I don't understand how dumping money into government jobs..who are just a select few contractors is going to the greater good.
all I see are mom and pop getting screwed.

Mr. Right: yelmrog:
Here's a good one for ya:

Herbert Hoover. Let the economy do its thing. Disastrous economy.

/Hey, this is fun!

Wrong. Hoover had a chance to let the economy fix itself. He failed. See Smoot-Hawley. That is what is called managing the economy. It failed.

One similarity though. Through his third election, FDR was blaming Hoover for the economy. Just like Obama and his minions blame Bush for every thing now and will likely continue to through his 2nd term, if we are so misfortunate as to have to endure that.

Smoot Hawley didn't pass into law until 1930. By then, the stock market had been in shambles for 9 months and the Dust Bowl (has nothing to do with "managing" or "not managing" the economy, imagine that!) had begun putting the final nails in the coffin of the small family-owned American farm.

The run-up to the Stock Market crash was a direct result of everyone thinking "hey, lets just ride this pony as far as it'll go" with no thought given to regulating the ridiculous margin buying that was going on.

Smoot-Hawley prolonged the Depression, but the reasons behind everything being screwed up had more to do with "letting the economy go" than "managing" the economy.

Whatsleft: StickyBunBandit: Once upon a time there was a country having hard times.With a new leader, the government created jobs and took over banking and industry.Sound familiar?

Sweden?

jinx!

Somaticasual: Doctor Funkenstein:

Someone should really 'shop palin in place of the baby. That'd be hilarious..

ZOMG! That would be ha-larious! It's not like we haven't already seen 100 more Palin photoshops than we needed to see in the first place, right? And who wants to laugh at a photoshop where Obama is the only one to laugh at? That's blasphemy!

oh god, quit your farking biatching already. at least obama isn't taking vacation after vacation after vacation while the country that he was elected to lead was circling the drain economically. at least he WAS elected, and he didn't start a war with another country based on outright lies and faulty intelligence. you farking idiots sit here and biatch about the man, while simultaneously fellating the man who did all these things, and left the next guy to clean up his mess.

/man up and admit you were wrong, instead of hurling these outright idiotic statements around like so much miasma.

Terryg999: YOU. CANT. FLOOD. THE. MARKET. WITH. FIAT. CURRENCY. and expect things to get better.

It might look like things are getting better for your 24-hour news cycle, but over a period of years its just not going to happen.

Disagree.
One of our most prosperous periods was immediately after WWII.
The primary reason for this was the number of jobs and companies that were created during wartime industry.

War can be said to be something like a huge social program; the government wants something done (war) and spends lots of money it may or may not have in order to do it. Building tanks, planes, guns, whatever, the government wants it, they hand out money for it, somebody finds a way to capitalize and build it, creating long-term jobs and revenue in the process.

This stimulus package aims to do the same thing, but instead of guns and bombs, we start building a new energy infrastructure; wind power, solar technology, carbon-capture, and more. In the process we stop spending hundreds of billions buying oil off the market, energy becomes cheaper and cleaner, and the long-term jobs associated with building and maintaining the infrastructure are created.

Yet people seem to think this is a terrible, irresponsible idea. Why? Is it because the end product is useful? Apparently the government spending money to destroy things is fine, but god help us if we spend money to do something constructive.

pascoffee: I don't understand how dumping money into government jobs.

Fear is no excuse for not knowing what's going on.

Mr. Right: clgrin: Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: Mr. Right:
"Everybody has asked the question, what shall we do...? I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!" - Frederick Douglas

The man was ahead of his time.

Said a man whose people we're kept in chains for an economic incentive.

The problem is that the economic incentive didn't work. The slave economy in the South was in abysmal shape at the time of the Civil War. The economy of the North was booming. Free enterprise and all that. But Douglass was a brilliant man. Up from slavery, yet he did indeed hit the nail on the head. Leave us alone and we succeed. Help us and do us the more mischief.

/I love the turn of phrase that Douglass was capable of. Apparently even the uneducated had more grammar skills in those days.

That's the point though. You're correct, the slave economy was a money loser on the whole and had been for some time. Yet slavery persisted and was alleviated, for better or worse, through government action. No large scale attempt was made inside the community to buy the slaves out, as was the case in Britain. Douglas (a great man to be sure) would have been a fool not the see an outmoded economy drifting along of its own inertia and the participation of those involved in it. Such economies that existed in other places in the world were either ended by outside (gov't) intervention or by slave revolts... and I know Douglas was not a proponent of an uprising.

Um, yeah... keep waiting on that sheeple.

Everytime you print money out of nothing, a pygmy marmoset dies.

please think of pygmy marmosets.

ok in all seriousness the bailouts and stimulus was a BUSH IDEA and now obama has become Bailout and stimulus happy. whats the deal man obama wasn't supposed to be this. you guys voted for him.

/you get what you payed for hehehehee

xaveth: Um, yeah... keep waiting on that sheeple.

If you have any better ideas, offer them up, or STFU.

Mr. Right: clgrin: Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: Mr. Right:
"Everybody has asked the question, what shall we do...? I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!" - Frederick Douglas

The man was ahead of his time.

Said a man whose people we're kept in chains for an economic incentive.

The problem is that the economic incentive didn't work. The slave economy in the South was in abysmal shape at the time of the Civil War. The economy of the North was booming. Free enterprise and all that. But Douglass was a brilliant man. Up from slavery, yet he did indeed hit the nail on the head. Leave us alone and we succeed. Help us and do us the more mischief.

/I love the turn of phrase that Douglass was capable of. Apparently even the uneducated had more grammar skills in those days.

Douglass was self-educated. Big difference.

/he also happened to very smart, which never hurts.

mark12A: A top tax rate of 70-90% sure didn't hurt economic growth in the postwar 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's and part of the 80's. There's no reason why it would hurt economic growth today.

Money is a lot more mobile these days. Soak the rich, and they'll pull up stakes and move their business interests to China, S. Korea, South America, etc. The rich stayed here after WWII because their weren't a lot of alternatives.

Not only that, but back then we still had tax havens. The Caribbean, swiss bank accounts, art galleries, all sorts of crazy and (more or less) legal (at the time) schemes to keep the IRS at bay. During the 1980s most of those tax havens went away, but so did the high taxes.

If you level a really high tax rate on the rich, they will probably just leave the country (look at the Beatles, John Lennon moved to NYC due to the UK's ultra high tax bracket). If the rich leave, chances are you are going to see even more jobs outsourced, which raises unemployment, which leaves us in the same situation we have now.

yelmrog:
Smoot Hawley didn't pass into law until 1930. By then, the stock market had been in shambles for 9 months and the Dust Bowl (has nothing to do with "managing" or "not managing" the economy, imagine that!) had begun putting the final nails in the coffin of the small family-owned American farm.

The run-up to the Stock Market crash was a direct result of everyone thinking "hey, lets just ride this pony as far as it'll go" with no thought given to regulating the ridiculous margin buying that was going on.

Smoot-Hawley prolonged the Depression, but the reasons behind everything being screwed up had more to do with "letting the economy go" than "managing" the economy.

You need to study economis with somebody who isn't a left-wing anti-capitalist. You might get a better picture of history.

Whether an administration tries to manage the economy or not is not the only factor in economic prosperity or the lack thereof. But it is true that every government, globally, that has tried to manage the economy has failed or kept its populace impoverished. When the economy is free and people are left to pursue their own interests and the government serves to protect their property rights instead of trample them, the economy succeeds.

When your leftist professors pointed out all of the little factors that contributed to the Depression that were not directly the result of government meddling, they were desperately trying to make the case that government meddling isn't bad. It is. Always. Well-thought out regulations that follow the basic premises of "thou shalt not steal" and "thou shalt not covet" are needed, just as we have laws against assault and murder. But trying to direct the economy will always fail. Which gets back to my original point. Obama will fail.

I might listen to the opinions of Obama's detractors if they hadn't started criticizing his performance weeks before he was even sworn in.

That, and the idea that he is also somehow responsible for damage to the economy that happened before he was even elected.

I'm waiting to hear about how he caused the recession during the Carter Administration.

And how he initiated the Pelopponesian War.

And fed Eve that damned apple.

Surprise, Republicans! The water doesn't run hot the second you turn it on. Now come on... don't get mad.... No tears now.

someahole: John Lennon moved to NYC due

And John Lydon, Eric Clapton etc etc either moved to the US outright or got places here to spend enough time each year out of the UK to avoid the taxes there.

Terryg999:
YOU. CANT. FLOOD. THE. MARKET. WITH. FIAT. CURRENCY.



Paultards are QUEER!

allegedman: Everytime you print money out of nothing, a pygmy marmoset dies.

please think of pygmy marmosets.

ok in all seriousness the bailouts and stimulus was a BUSH IDEA and now obama has become Bailout and stimulus happy. whats the deal man obama wasn't supposed to be this. you guys voted for him.

/you get what you payed for hehehehee

Why do people keep saying he's stimulus happy... goddammitsomuch. I'll say this nice and big with a damn link:
Obama dismissed the idea of a second stimulus
Link (new window)

Mr. Right: When the economy is free and people are left to pursue their own interests and the government serves to protect their property rights instead of trample them, the economy succeeds.

The people of 19th century England might want to have a word with you.

Obama will fail.

And it just makes you giggle with glee a the thought he will.

yesanded: I might listen to the opinions of Obama's detractors if they hadn't started criticizing his performance weeks before he was even sworn in.

That, and the idea that he is also somehow responsible for damage to the economy that happened before he was even elected.

I'm waiting to hear about how he caused the recession during the Carter Administration.

And how he initiated the Pelopponesian War.

And fed Eve that damned apple.

Surprise, Republicans! The water doesn't run hot the second you turn it on. Now come on... don't get mad.... No tears now.

Right before Clinton left office, he had a press conference about the coming recession not being his fault, but the fault of a man about to be sworn in.

I've been told unemployment is great!