Democrats caused recession in 2007

[kaz]

He doesn't even understand the discussion because he's a dumb ass. I was explaining the principle. He keeps thinking when I say "all else held equal" that it means there are no other variables. That isn't what it means. It means we are analyzing the effect of one variable, not that there are no other variables.

I said the example itself was completely made up, but I was explaining that to him

There is a joke about economists, the punchline of which is

"Assume we have a can opener....."

Your illustration is a perfect example...

That made no sense in the context of anything I said.

To a liberal, being snarky is a "perfect example" of anything

In order to demonstrate that "printing money" devalues currency, you assume that printing money devalues currency......

It was an example of what it means to analyze a single variable. You're stupid as fuck. How do you not grasp that?

Skylar keeps thinking when I said "all else held equal," it meant there are no other variables. If you hacks had gone to college, you'd have had to have come across that concept before. It's basic to any analysis discussion.

Ceteris paribus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How does assuming the value of the single variable "test" it?

That is Tautologicus paribus...

I went to perfectly good college, and spent more hours delving into macro econ over the past 6 months than you have in your entire 22 years on the planet.

OK, I'm done now with Skylar and you for this discussion. You are just too stupid. I've explained to you like three times the concept of ceteris paribus. I also provided a link to the description of it so you could read that. I said I was explaining that CONCEPT to the retarded Mr. Skylar.

How the two of you can't grasp that is beyond me. But I'm not wasting my time on this anymore. I'm not explaining this simple concept to you again

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Nearly half of U.S. workers consider themselves underemployed, report says
Three-quarters of those who label themselves as such say they're not working in a job that uses their education and training. One quarter say they are working part time but want full-time work.
Nearly half of U.S. workers consider themselves underemployed, report says

Seems the article is self contradicting.

Do you see where they get anywhere near 50% from? I don't.

Here is what they do say:

Taking into account people who were working part time because they couldn't find full-time jobs as well as discouraged people who stopped looking, the rate was 9.7 percent, still above pre-recession levels of 8.4 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.


So 9.7% now vs. 8.4% at height of the bubble, doesn't seem far off considering it came down from around 15%

You forgot to take into account those college graduates who ended up with jobs not utilizing their degree, while still having to pay their tuition costs utilized in obtaining that degree.

Yes there were disgruntled workers because either (1) they couldn't stay employed because they had difficulty finding long term full employment, or (2) they could only find part time work. Either case they couldn't generate enough household income to match the career salary they had once acquired before the recession, unless they sought to try to supplement it the best they couod working two part time positions. Which of course the Obama administration was only so happy to simply brag about in their monthly job numbers report, even though a deeper look may reveal it's actually one individual working two part time jobs.

In short, the economy never really took off to where it was no longer a concern in the minds of the voters, as it still is with 2016 numbers below those reported in 2007. Hardly a big improvement despite the stimulus money and the repeated push to continue funding infrastructure.

Insistently, if infrastructure is the best Hillary can do without any new ideas an policy that actually "encourages" job growth, you can expect pretty much more of the same results. Her speech before the DNC was nothing more than the same script offered by Obama when he first campaigned for office.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The very unavoidable simple fact is there were people lying in wait to profit over a recession and Donald Trump was vocal about it.

Two years before the housing market collapsed in 2008 and millions of Americans lost their homes, Donald Trump said he was hoping for a crash.

"I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy," Trump said in a 2006 audiobook from Trump University, answering a question about "gloomy predictions that the real estate market is heading for a spectacular crash."

He isn't at fault himself, but he and many other speculators surely endorsed policies that would help them get to that point.

Looks like Mr Trump has enough knowledge to see a bad situation and find a way to turn it around into generating something positive. He knows how the business system works because he is in it, using revenue to create opportunities through spending, which creates employment to those in which he needs their services to build and buy products from which to increase his business.

His dad, for example, was a builder that created apartments for those returning vets who were in need of it returning from the war. That was one of several accomplishments an immigrant from Germany was able to do.

I'm sure the left is familiar with spending money as a means to try and generate employment, they tried it through the stimulus bill. It's the accomplishment that liberals think will actually work, instead of creating an atmosphere where businesses themselves can flourish, and spend their own capital, and create jobs, in order to generate more revenue.

 

[Clementine]

Whenever democrats want to say that it was the economic policies of the repubican party that led to the recession of 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 then someone should just point out this video


There are plenty of other videos of democrats preventing people from addressing the issues that led to the housing bubble and collapse.

Oh, yes, Republicans tried on numerous occasions to bring attention to the impending crisis. The Dems viciously attacked those who expressed concerns over the banking practices. I think the left wanted a crisis that they could use to their advantage. They are the ones who forced banks to make the bad loans. They are the ones who loosened regulations. They are the ones who encouraged people to take out mortgages they couldn't afford. They are the ones who used Fannie and Freddie to buy up those loans, knowing they were worthless. Then they used the banks as their own personal slush fund. Obama was the second highest recipient of F and F money. The Dems lined up to fight against more oversight and better regulations. The loans continued to be packaged and sold as if they had value and a virtual game of hot potato began to see who would get stuck with those toxic loans. All the value existed only on paper and that meant they had to pretend that the loans were going to make banks money.

The Dems stood there one by one and blasted the Republicans for claiming that things were going to blow up. As soon as the shit hit the fan, the Dems had the nerve to blame the banks. The same banks that the Clinton administration threatened when he demanded they make those loans. Bill Clinton took Carter's Community Reinvestment Act and put it on steroids. A housing bubble was the only possible outcome and they all knew that. But, having a major crisis, that they wouldn't let go to waste, was just what they wanted.

 

[PredFan]

Get an education, then get back to us.

What kind of education convinced you that this is an acceptable counter-argument?

You need to go get your money back, because you don't sound educated, you sound like an idiot.

Dumbass. It wasn't meant to be a counter-argument. It was a request. An education will make it less boring to discuss things with you.

Now get to it!

 

[Faun]

Democrats WANTED the recession, Democrats were desperate for the recession and fanned the flames every chance they got. Why? So they could retake congress and the White House. Untold millions thrown under the bus so a handful of Democrats to win an election. They are vile filth.

Who says that democrats wanted a recession? You do, citing yourself.

Who says that they 'fanned the flames every chance they got'? You do, citing yourself.

Its you citing yourself in their motivations, you citing yourself on their goals, you citing yourself on their preferred outcomes.

Um......do you have any argument that doesn't begin and end inside your own head?

Democratic party leaders are on video tape fool telling the country the economy is horrible, its dire, 5% unemployment is the end times, for the last 3 years of Bush 2nd term intentionally trying to tank the economy. This propaganda war was so bad that 2 months after Obama took office in 2009 Bill Clinton had to to tell the imbecile "hey dummy you won, enough with the doom and gloom talk". Suck on the truth.

WTF?? Democrat party leaders were still in the minority. Don't you rightwingers ever take responsibility for anything? Ever??

 

[Faun]

Except it isn't. The value of the dollar didn't go down in proportion to new dollars entering the market. No currency does. As the value of currency is based on multiple factors, the quantity of them only being one.

The dollar has stronger now than it was 10 years ago, despite significant increases to the national debt and the number of dollars on the market.

How do you explain the historic inconsistency between your assumptions....and reality?

I'm committed to the evidence. And it doesn't match your claims. Explain the inconsistencies. With evidence, please.

Printing money doesn't devalue currency, got it. You're a tool, man.

And your first part is exactly what I said in my second quote, you're assuming currency valuation is a single cause, it's not, Holmes

Can you provide a measure by which currency has been "devalued" in recent years?

I'm not proving the field of economics to you. If you google the subject, you'll get a plethora of sources.

And this is an answer to your question in the last post. One source you are ignoring? The field of economics

Allow me to be blunt for a moment....

You are bluffing......you have no idea what you are yammering about....

You can measure the value of the dollar against other currencies, financial or real assets....

In none of those categories can you find evidence of the "devaluation" of the dollar over the past 7 years.

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

 

[owebo]

Printing money doesn't devalue currency, got it. You're a tool, man.

And your first part is exactly what I said in my second quote, you're assuming currency valuation is a single cause, it's not, Holmes

Can you provide a measure by which currency has been "devalued" in recent years?

I'm not proving the field of economics to you. If you google the subject, you'll get a plethora of sources.

And this is an answer to your question in the last post. One source you are ignoring? The field of economics

Allow me to be blunt for a moment....

You are bluffing......you have no idea what you are yammering about....

You can measure the value of the dollar against other currencies, financial or real assets....

In none of those categories can you find evidence of the "devaluation" of the dollar over the past 7 years.

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

 

[Faun]

Democrats WANTED the recession, Democrats were desperate for the recession and fanned the flames every chance they got. Why? So they could retake congress and the White House. Untold millions thrown under the bus so a handful of Democrats to win an election. They are vile filth.

How did they effect that?


You are an imbecile.

When Bush attempted several times to get control of Fannie and Freddie to stave off this nightmare it was Democrats in Congress who blocked him, FACT. Its on video. Suck on it.

LOLOL

The only possible way Democrats, who were in the minority party for most of those years, could have block the majority party Republicans; would have been to filibuster in the Senate.

Which means you can either cite the bill numbers to GSE reform bills Democrats filibustered -- or -- go down in flames with your bullshit.

I already know where this is heading. Let's see if you do too.....

 

[Faun]

Can you provide a measure by which currency has been "devalued" in recent years?

I'm not proving the field of economics to you. If you google the subject, you'll get a plethora of sources.

And this is an answer to your question in the last post. One source you are ignoring? The field of economics

Allow me to be blunt for a moment....

You are bluffing......you have no idea what you are yammering about....

You can measure the value of the dollar against other currencies, financial or real assets....

In none of those categories can you find evidence of the "devaluation" of the dollar over the past 7 years.

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

 

[Faun]

Whenever democrats want to say that it was the economic policies of the repubican party that led to the recession of 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 then someone should just point out this video


There are plenty of other videos of democrats preventing people from addressing the issues that led to the housing bubble and collapse.

The Democrats didn't cause the collapse, but they had a chance to head it off and did nothing. In fact they were warned by Bush and he asked them to act 5 times. Each time they said no. They wanted it to happen so they could blame Bush and win elections.

You are clearly entirely unfamiliar with the FCIC report.....

Clearly so are you. The facts are that Congress WAS warned. And they did nothing. That is an unarguable fact.

And Democrats got a GSE reform bill to the president's desk.

Republicans?

 

[owebo]

I'm not proving the field of economics to you. If you google the subject, you'll get a plethora of sources.

And this is an answer to your question in the last post. One source you are ignoring? The field of economics

Allow me to be blunt for a moment....

You are bluffing......you have no idea what you are yammering about....

You can measure the value of the dollar against other currencies, financial or real assets....

In none of those categories can you find evidence of the "devaluation" of the dollar over the past 7 years.

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

No...it means you're a fucking clueless liberal....

 

[Faun]

In the aftermath of the US Treasury’s decision to seize control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, critics have hit at lax oversight of the mortgage companies.


The dominant theme has been that Congress let the two government-sponsored enterprises morph into a creature that eventually threatened the US financial system. Mike Oxley will have none of it.

Instead, the Ohio Republican who headed the House financial services committee until his retirement after mid-term elections last year, blames the mess on ideologues within the White House as well as Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve.


The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley, now vice-chairman of
Nasdaq.


He fumes about the criticism of his House colleagues. “All the handwringing and bedwetting is going on without remembering how the House stepped up on this,” he says. “What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”

Oxley hits back at ideologues - FT.com

July 2003

Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska), Elizabeth Dole (R-North Carolina) and John Sununu (R-New Hampshire) introduced legislation to address Regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The bill was blocked by Democrats.

That would be S. 1508: Federal Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2003

A bill you claim was blocked by Democrats.

But let's take a look at what actually happened to that bill, shall we...?

Last action:
Reported by Committee
A committee has issued a report to the full chamber recommending that the bill be considered further. Only about 1 in 4 bills are reported out of committee.​

So the bill was sent to Senate leadership with the recommendation of further consideration, which had Senate leadership wanted, could have put the bill on the Senate's legislative calendar to be put to an up/down vote by the full Senate.

That never happened.

So who blocked the bill from being put to an up/.down vote by the full Senate? You claim it was Democrats. But were Democrats in charge of the Senate in 2003/2004? No, of course not. Republicans were and Bill Frist R-TN was the Senate Majority Leader who squashed that bill.

We'll just file this under 'A' -- for Another brain dead conservative regurgitating bullshit on the forum.

 

[owebo]

This is my favorite thing the Edonomist sometimes talks about.....it's impossible to find in liberal circles however....for it spells out the doom that is upon us.....

 

[Faun]

Allow me to be blunt for a moment....

You are bluffing......you have no idea what you are yammering about....

You can measure the value of the dollar against other currencies, financial or real assets....

In none of those categories can you find evidence of the "devaluation" of the dollar over the past 7 years.

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

No...it means you're a fucking clueless liberal....

Should I care what the moron, who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're," thinks of me?

Regardless, Kaz's claims are put to the test and they failed. Miserably. I don't expect a moron like you to understand.

 

[owebo]

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

No...it means you're a fucking clueless liberal....

Should I care what the moron, who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're," thinks of me?

Regardless, Kaz's claims are put to the test and they failed. Miserably. I don't expect a moron like you to understand.

I'm talking over you since you have no clue what inflation is.....

 

[kaz]

Can you provide a measure by which currency has been "devalued" in recent years?

I'm not proving the field of economics to you. If you google the subject, you'll get a plethora of sources.

And this is an answer to your question in the last post. One source you are ignoring? The field of economics

Allow me to be blunt for a moment....

You are bluffing......you have no idea what you are yammering about....

You can measure the value of the dollar against other currencies, financial or real assets....

In none of those categories can you find evidence of the "devaluation" of the dollar over the past 7 years.

So it actually makes sense to you that printing money creates economic value? You sit there and say yeah, of course it does?

Explain in the context of the field of economics how you know the field of economics is wrong

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Faun is gay as fucking shit and in complete love with me. It's sick. He follows me around saying I'm "kazzing," his queer own pet little queer term. He's obsessed with quoting my posts and trying to get my attention. I only see him when people I do respect like you quote him like you did here. I guess he thinks it's cute, but it's completely creepy. Sorry Faun, but I'm not a fag. And even if I were. Eew

 

[kaz]

Well this couldn't be easier to solve ... either inflation rates are way up under Obama or you're just kazzing again.

You tell me.....

Historical Inflation Rates: 1914-2016

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

No...it means you're a fucking clueless liberal....

Should I care what the moron, who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're," thinks of me?

Regardless, Kaz's claims are put to the test and they failed. Miserably. I don't expect a moron like you to understand.

I'm talking over you since you have no clue what inflation is.....

God Faun, are you grammer checking again? Talk about the useless domain of a troll. It's a message board. No one is going to spend their time grammar and spell checking the shit out of their posts. Anyway, it's been real. See you in the funny pages, I won't see your inane response. Though Karnac says it will contain "kazzing," your declaration of your undying love for me. What a fag.

I know it's your post, owebo, but that's obviously to Faun, not you

 

[owebo]

Oh my, are you fucking Serious?

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

No...it means you're a fucking clueless liberal....

Should I care what the moron, who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're," thinks of me?

Regardless, Kaz's claims are put to the test and they failed. Miserably. I don't expect a moron like you to understand.

I'm talking over you since you have no clue what inflation is.....

God Faun, are you grammer checking again? Talk about the useless domain of a troll. It's a message board. No one is going to spend their time grammar and spell checking the shit out of their posts. Anyway, it's been real. See you in the funny pages, I won't see your inane response. Though Karnac says it will contain "kazzing," your declaration of your undying love for me. What a fag

He can't even comprehend the Big Mac graph....it drives liberals nuts....

 

[kaz]

Does this mean you think we shouldn't look at inflation rates to determine if Kaz is full of kaz or not?

No...it means you're a fucking clueless liberal....

Should I care what the moron, who doesn't know the difference between "your" and "you're," thinks of me?

Regardless, Kaz's claims are put to the test and they failed. Miserably. I don't expect a moron like you to understand.

I'm talking over you since you have no clue what inflation is.....

God Faun, are you grammer checking again? Talk about the useless domain of a troll. It's a message board. No one is going to spend their time grammar and spell checking the shit out of their posts. Anyway, it's been real. See you in the funny pages, I won't see your inane response. Though Karnac says it will contain "kazzing," your declaration of your undying love for me. What a fag

He can't even comprehend the Big Mac graph....it drives liberals nuts....

Yes, that buying the same thing costs more money over time means the currency has been devalued is a pretty subtle point that few people would grasp isn't it? [/sarcasm] Yeah, liberals are stupid as shit. It's sad. The proud product of a government education. Being proud of their crappy education is baffling. Sorry man, let's try that again ... [/sarcasm]