Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[Toddsterpatriot]

We not only have some real duds on this thread we have a few left extremes duds on this thread. I don't believe I have seen anyone so totally partisan to the extreme left as gnarley, phillips or indeependence any where else on the internet. Where do these duds get all their strange ideas about such easy to understand subjects? Anyone who believes that government policies were not the main cause of our housing crash and the recession in 2007/8/9 are complete fools.

"A pair of economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco added another piece of evidence to the case that the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act wasn’t the cause, or even a major contributor, to the subprime mortgage debacle.

"In a paper focused on California that was presented at a Fed conference on housing and mortgages in Washington, D.C., Elizabeth Laderman and Carolina Reid say the data 'should help to quell if not fully lay to rest the arguments that the CRA caused the current subprime lending boom by requiring banks to lend irresponsibly in low and moderate-income lenders.'

"Fed governor Randall Kroszner made a similar case earlier this week.

"Among the specific findings in 'Lending in Low- and Moderate-Income Neighborhoods in California: The Performance of CRA Lending During the Subprime Meltdown':

"Overall, lending to low and moderate income communities comprised only a small share of toal lending by CRA lenders, even during the height of the California subprime lending boom.

"Loans originated by lenders regulated under CRA in general were 'significantly less likely to be in foreclosure' than those originated by independent mortgage companies that weren’t covered by CRA.

"Loans made by CRA lenders within their geographic assessment areas covered by the law were 'half as likely to go into foreclosure' as those made by the independent mortgage companies.

"28% of loans made by CRA lenders in low income areas within their geographic assessment areas were fixed-rate loans, compared with 18.2% of loans made by independent mortgage companies in low income areas.

Don?t Blame CRA (The Sequel) - Real Time Economics - WSJ

If you're actually foolish enough to believe government doesn't work the way Wall Street wants, maybe you're too stupid to be here?

Here's How The Community Reinvestment Act Led To The Housing Bubble's Lax Lending - Business Insider

 

[georgephillip]

We have been discussing Capitalism in the US and on some occasions the rest of the industrialize world.

What happens in the 3rd world is important, but not relevant to our discussion of capitalism, which does give us the prosperity to help the needy the world over but more important to the subject you brought up, elevated the standards of living for the poor in the US such that our relative poor live better than most laborers in the third world. About 5 billion people in the world live in abject destitution. That is why I choose to give my charity to some of them rather than to the relatively poor in the US.

The subject of this thread, Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality", is entirely relevant to imperialism in Africa and elsewhere.

How else would good capitalists expand their markets and exploit the natural resources of others?

"In 'King Leopold's Ghost,' journalist Adam Hochschild chronicles the depredations of Belgian rule of the Congo (today's Zaire) between the 1880s and 1909, when Leopold, the king of Belgium, died.

"During this period, 5 million to 10 million people were killed, or died of starvation, disease and being worked to death.

"All of this for rubber, harvested from the thick vines that contained that precious gelatinous sap.

"Hochschild understandably wanted to know why so few of us have ever heard about the atrocities of Leopold's rule."

History of Capitalism in the Congo

The relevance of 3rd world conditions are entirely different today than they were between the 1880s and 1909 and even 40 or 50 years later. The big relevance today is mostly the cries and whines by some people who don't want the relative labor intensive jobs to be off shored. It is that type of job which has helped India to achieve a new middle class greater than the population of the US. The relevance to the 3rd world swirls around the industrialized world to allow some of their jobs escape to the third world.

You can back off your childish rants based on left wing propaganda.

Tell it to the Tutsi:

"This genocide resulted from the deliberate choice of a modern elite to foster hatred and fear to keep itself in power.

"This small, privileged group first set the majority against the minority to counter a growing political opposition within Rwanda.

"Then, faced with RPF success on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, these few powerholders transformed the strategy of ethnic division into genocide.

"They believed that the extermination campaign would restore the solidarity of the Hutu under their leadership and help them win the war, or at least improve their chances of negotiating a favorable peace.

"They seized control of the state and used its machinery and its authority to carry out the slaughter."

And they did so on behalf of western capitalists exactly like Leopold

Rwanda ? Global Issues

 

[bripat9643]

We not only have some real duds on this thread we have a few left extremes duds on this thread. I don't believe I have seen anyone so totally partisan to the extreme left as gnarley, phillips or indeependence any where else on the internet. Where do these duds get all their strange ideas about such easy to understand subjects? Anyone who believes that government policies were not the main cause of our housing crash and the recession in 2007/8/9 are complete fools.

"A pair of economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco added another piece of evidence to the case that the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act wasn’t the cause, or even a major contributor, to the subprime mortgage debacle.

"In a paper focused on California that was presented at a Fed conference on housing and mortgages in Washington, D.C., Elizabeth Laderman and Carolina Reid say the data 'should help to quell if not fully lay to rest the arguments that the CRA caused the current subprime lending boom by requiring banks to lend irresponsibly in low and moderate-income lenders.'

"Fed governor Randall Kroszner made a similar case earlier this week.

"Among the specific findings in 'Lending in Low- and Moderate-Income Neighborhoods in California: The Performance of CRA Lending During the Subprime Meltdown':

"Overall, lending to low and moderate income communities comprised only a small share of toal lending by CRA lenders, even during the height of the California subprime lending boom.

"Loans originated by lenders regulated under CRA in general were 'significantly less likely to be in foreclosure' than those originated by independent mortgage companies that weren’t covered by CRA.

"Loans made by CRA lenders within their geographic assessment areas covered by the law were 'half as likely to go into foreclosure' as those made by the independent mortgage companies.

"28% of loans made by CRA lenders in low income areas within their geographic assessment areas were fixed-rate loans, compared with 18.2% of loans made by independent mortgage companies in low income areas.

Don?t Blame CRA (The Sequel) - Real Time Economics - WSJ

If you're actually foolish enough to believe government doesn't work the way Wall Street wants, maybe you're too stupid to be here?

Here's How The Community Reinvestment Act Led To The Housing Bubble's Lax Lending - Business Insider

It doesn't matter how many times you post it, they will continue to claim it was "unregulated capitalism" that cause the recession. That's called "the big lie" technique. Libturds aren't interested in knowing the truth. They just mindlessly regurgitate whatever propaganda advances their agenda. They will never reconsider their premises.

 

[crisismangement]

The subject of this thread, Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality", is entirely relevant to imperialism in Africa and elsewhere.

How else would good capitalists expand their markets and exploit the natural resources of others?

"In 'King Leopold's Ghost,' journalist Adam Hochschild chronicles the depredations of Belgian rule of the Congo (today's Zaire) between the 1880s and 1909, when Leopold, the king of Belgium, died.

"During this period, 5 million to 10 million people were killed, or died of starvation, disease and being worked to death.

"All of this for rubber, harvested from the thick vines that contained that precious gelatinous sap.

"Hochschild understandably wanted to know why so few of us have ever heard about the atrocities of Leopold's rule."

History of Capitalism in the Congo

The relevance of 3rd world conditions are entirely different today than they were between the 1880s and 1909 and even 40 or 50 years later. The big relevance today is mostly the cries and whines by some people who don't want the relative labor intensive jobs to be off shored. It is that type of job which has helped India to achieve a new middle class greater than the population of the US. The relevance to the 3rd world swirls around the industrialized world to allow some of their jobs escape to the third world.

You can back off your childish rants based on left wing propaganda.

Tell it to the Tutsi:

"This genocide resulted from the deliberate choice of a modern elite to foster hatred and fear to keep itself in power.

"This small, privileged group first set the majority against the minority to counter a growing political opposition within Rwanda.

"Then, faced with RPF success on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, these few powerholders transformed the strategy of ethnic division into genocide.

"They believed that the extermination campaign would restore the solidarity of the Hutu under their leadership and help them win the war, or at least improve their chances of negotiating a favorable peace.

"They seized control of the state and used its machinery and its authority to carry out the slaughter."

And they did so on behalf of western capitalists exactly like Leopold

Rwanda ? Global Issues

Capitalism did not cause the genocide in Rwanda. I can tell that to the Tutsi. It was a tribal issue. One need not try to "rationalize" an economics answer. The left tards propaganda tries to blame capitalism for ever glitch and belch which appears to go against their propaganda. Most issues, good or bad, have simple reasons or causes, but the left tards try very hard to complicate everything they don't understand. Looking for the simple solution solves the great majority of all issues.

 

[georgephillip]

The relevance of 3rd world conditions are entirely different today than they were between the 1880s and 1909 and even 40 or 50 years later. The big relevance today is mostly the cries and whines by some people who don't want the relative labor intensive jobs to be off shored. It is that type of job which has helped India to achieve a new middle class greater than the population of the US. The relevance to the 3rd world swirls around the industrialized world to allow some of their jobs escape to the third world.

You can back off your childish rants based on left wing propaganda.

Tell it to the Tutsi:

"This genocide resulted from the deliberate choice of a modern elite to foster hatred and fear to keep itself in power.

"This small, privileged group first set the majority against the minority to counter a growing political opposition within Rwanda.

"Then, faced with RPF success on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, these few powerholders transformed the strategy of ethnic division into genocide.

"They believed that the extermination campaign would restore the solidarity of the Hutu under their leadership and help them win the war, or at least improve their chances of negotiating a favorable peace.

"They seized control of the state and used its machinery and its authority to carry out the slaughter."

And they did so on behalf of western capitalists exactly like Leopold

Rwanda ? Global Issues

Capitalism did not cause the genocide in Rwanda. I can tell that to the Tutsi. It was a tribal issue. One need not try to "rationalize" an economics answer. The left tards propaganda tries to blame capitalism for ever glitch and belch which appears to go against their propaganda. Most issues, good or bad, have simple reasons or causes, but the left tards try very hard to complicate everything they don't understand. Looking for the simple solution solves the great majority of all issues.

What do you know about Rwanda that Human Rights Watch doesn't?

Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda (Human Rights Watch Report, March 1999)

 

[bedowin62]

Human Rights Watch hypocrites?

surely you jest leftard?

 

[georgephillip]

Human Rights Watch hypocrites?

surely you jest leftard?

"Policymakers in France, Belgium, and the United States and at the United Nations all knew of the preparations for massive slaughter and failed to take the steps needed to prevent it.

"Aware from the start that Tutsi were being targeted for elimination, the leading foreign actors refused to acknowledge the genocide.

"To have stopped the leaders and the zealots would have required military force; in the early stages, a relatively small force. Not only did international leaders reject this course, but they also declined for weeks to use their political and moral authority to challenge the legitimacy of the genocidal government.

"They refused to declare that a government guilty of exterminating its citizens would never receive international assistance.

"They did nothing to silence the radio that broadcast calls for slaughter.

"Such simple measures would have sapped the strength of the authorities bent on mass murder and encouraged Rwandan opposition to the extermination campaign."

Introduction (HRW Report - Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda, March 1999)

 

[bedowin62]

Human Rights Watch hypocrites?

surely you jest leftard?

"Policymakers in France, Belgium, and the United States and at the United Nations all knew of the preparations for massive slaughter and failed to take the steps needed to prevent it.

"Aware from the start that Tutsi were being targeted for elimination, the leading foreign actors refused to acknowledge the genocide.

"To have stopped the leaders and the zealots would have required military force; in the early stages, a relatively small force. Not only did international leaders reject this course, but they also declined for weeks to use their political and moral authority to challenge the legitimacy of the genocidal government.

"They refused to declare that a government guilty of exterminating its citizens would never receive international assistance.

"They did nothing to silence the radio that broadcast calls for slaughter.

"Such simple measures would have sapped the strength of the authorities bent on mass murder and encouraged Rwandan opposition to the extermination campaign."

Introduction (HRW Report - Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda, March 1999)

"policymakers'
you mean politicians leftard

but you're here trying to defend the idiot leftnut that says corporations are to blame arent you?


fool

 

[dnsmith35]

Tell it to the Tutsi:

"This genocide resulted from the deliberate choice of a modern elite to foster hatred and fear to keep itself in power.

"This small, privileged group first set the majority against the minority to counter a growing political opposition within Rwanda.

"Then, faced with RPF success on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, these few powerholders transformed the strategy of ethnic division into genocide.

"They believed that the extermination campaign would restore the solidarity of the Hutu under their leadership and help them win the war, or at least improve their chances of negotiating a favorable peace.

"They seized control of the state and used its machinery and its authority to carry out the slaughter."

And they did so on behalf of western capitalists exactly like Leopold

Rwanda ? Global Issues

Capitalism did not cause the genocide in Rwanda. I can tell that to the Tutsi. It was a tribal issue. One need not try to "rationalize" an economics answer. The left tards propaganda tries to blame capitalism for ever glitch and belch which appears to go against their propaganda. Most issues, good or bad, have simple reasons or causes, but the left tards try very hard to complicate everything they don't understand. Looking for the simple solution solves the great majority of all issues.

What do you know about Rwanda that Human Rights Watch doesn't?

Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda (Human Rights Watch Report, March 1999)

There are some left wing sites, Human Rights Watch is one of them, whose propaganda tend to try to make capitalism the culprit. The point is, what they say MAY have a smattering of truth, but their conclusions tend to be propaganda. Organizations like that look for even the smallest points against capitalism and then come on big time trying to prove (unsuccessfully) that capitalism is the entire cause, or major cause. In Rwanda tribal hatred was the primary issue. If some capitalist somewhere in the world tried to take advantage of this the likely hood it would have either started the slaughter or stopped in are slim to known. I have observed things like that to the point I automatically throw out conclusions made by those organizations. Reading their assertions proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

 

[Redfish]

I cannot believe that this stupid thread is still alive-------MODS, close it

 

[dnsmith35]

Talk about truisms!

"You cannot reason a left winger out of a position he did not reach through reason."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Human Rights Watch hypocrites?

surely you jest leftard?

"Policymakers in France, Belgium, and the United States and at the United Nations all knew of the preparations for massive slaughter and failed to take the steps needed to prevent it.

"Aware from the start that Tutsi were being targeted for elimination, the leading foreign actors refused to acknowledge the genocide.

"To have stopped the leaders and the zealots would have required military force; in the early stages, a relatively small force. Not only did international leaders reject this course, but they also declined for weeks to use their political and moral authority to challenge the legitimacy of the genocidal government.

"They refused to declare that a government guilty of exterminating its citizens would never receive international assistance.

"They did nothing to silence the radio that broadcast calls for slaughter.

"Such simple measures would have sapped the strength of the authorities bent on mass murder and encouraged Rwandan opposition to the extermination campaign."

Introduction (HRW Report - Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda, March 1999)

Thanks for the link.
Which doesn't mention capitalism or corporation.

Neg Rep.

 

[dnsmith35]

Human Rights Watch hypocrites?

surely you jest leftard?

"Policymakers in France, Belgium, and the United States and at the United Nations all knew of the preparations for massive slaughter and failed to take the steps needed to prevent it.

"Aware from the start that Tutsi were being targeted for elimination, the leading foreign actors refused to acknowledge the genocide.

"To have stopped the leaders and the zealots would have required military force; in the early stages, a relatively small force. Not only did international leaders reject this course, but they also declined for weeks to use their political and moral authority to challenge the legitimacy of the genocidal government.

"They refused to declare that a government guilty of exterminating its citizens would never receive international assistance.

"They did nothing to silence the radio that broadcast calls for slaughter.

"Such simple measures would have sapped the strength of the authorities bent on mass murder and encouraged Rwandan opposition to the extermination campaign."

Introduction (HRW Report - Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda, March 1999)

Thanks for the link.
Which doesn't mention capitalism or corporation.

Neg Rep.

That is a typical extremist ploy, post a link which MAY sound a little like the point in the hopes people believe them. I seldom believe links unless there is no editorialism and the story shows a study with empirical proof. Most of the links the extremists use are vague opinion pieces/blogs/editorials.

Case on point: Diamond and Saez did a "study" using empirical data in the hopes to establish that the marginal utility of money ALWAYS diminishes which to them was justification for more progressive tax on the rich. Keep in mind, I agree with a more progressive tax on the rich, but it galls me when economist of a specific political bent skews a study to get the results they want. The first thing I saw in their study was an error in one of their assumptions, that the marginal unit always remains the same even as one gains wealth. That is categorically wrong because as wealth increases it takes ever larger marginal units to satisfy their unlimited desire for wealth. That is a basic axiom of economic thought based on human behavior; and choosing to veer from it will always skew the study and cause incorrect conclusions.

 

[georgephillip]

Capitalism did not cause the genocide in Rwanda. I can tell that to the Tutsi. It was a tribal issue. One need not try to "rationalize" an economics answer. The left tards propaganda tries to blame capitalism for ever glitch and belch which appears to go against their propaganda. Most issues, good or bad, have simple reasons or causes, but the left tards try very hard to complicate everything they don't understand. Looking for the simple solution solves the great majority of all issues.

What do you know about Rwanda that Human Rights Watch doesn't?

Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda (Human Rights Watch Report, March 1999)

There are some left wing sites, Human Rights Watch is one of them, whose propaganda tend to try to make capitalism the culprit. The point is, what they say MAY have a smattering of truth, but their conclusions tend to be propaganda. Organizations like that look for even the smallest points against capitalism and then come on big time trying to prove (unsuccessfully) that capitalism is the entire cause, or major cause. In Rwanda tribal hatred was the primary issue. If some capitalist somewhere in the world tried to take advantage of this the likely hood it would have either started the slaughter or stopped in are slim to known. I have observed things like that to the point I automatically throw out conclusions made by those organizations. Reading their assertions proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

They prove you've managed to stick your head so far up your ass you'll need another 78 years to remove it.

 

[dnsmith35]

What do you know about Rwanda that Human Rights Watch doesn't?

Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda (Human Rights Watch Report, March 1999)

There are some left wing sites, Human Rights Watch is one of them, whose propaganda tend to try to make capitalism the culprit. The point is, what they say MAY have a smattering of truth, but their conclusions tend to be propaganda. Organizations like that look for even the smallest points against capitalism and then come on big time trying to prove (unsuccessfully) that capitalism is the entire cause, or major cause. In Rwanda tribal hatred was the primary issue. If some capitalist somewhere in the world tried to take advantage of this the likely hood it would have either started the slaughter or stopped in are slim to known. I have observed things like that to the point I automatically throw out conclusions made by those organizations. Reading their assertions proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

They prove you've managed to stick your head so far up your ass you'll need another 78 years to remove it.

Typical response from someone so totally defeated in debate he can't stand it. I am a liberal, not a left wing fanatic like George Phillips. The difference between us is massive. I don't accept the extremes of either end of the spectrum.

 

[dnsmith35]

Where to left wing extremists get their economic news?

 

[Contumacious]

. I am a liberal, not a left wing fanatic like George Phillips. The difference between us is massive. I don't accept the extremes of either end of the spectrum.

Of course there is. He believes in Tyranny 100% of the time and yourself only 99.9% of the time.

.

 

[dnsmith35]

. I am a liberal, not a left wing fanatic like george phillips. The difference between us is massive. I don't accept the extremes of either end of the spectrum.

of course there is. He believes in tyranny 100% of the time and yourself only 99.9% of the time.

.

rotflmao!

 

[dnsmith35]

Cynicism linked to greater dementia risk - CNN.com

 

[crisismangement]

. I am a liberal, not a left wing fanatic like George Phillips. The difference between us is massive. I don't accept the extremes of either end of the spectrum.

Of course there is. He believes in Tyranny 100% of the time and yourself only 99.9% of the time.

.

Of all the people on this board you could believe in tyranny, you missed by a mile.