The "free market" is a Big Government Program

[Andylusion]

By the way, we're all capitalists. You own something. That something is capital.

But again... the "capitalists" have no ability to determine the value of your labor. The customer does

Does your definition of capital accord with this one?

What Is Capital?

"Capital is a term for financial assets, such as funds held in deposit accounts and/or funds obtained from special financing sources. Capital can also be associated with capital assets of a company that requires significant amounts of capital to finance or expand."

Capitalists typically pay workers they employ as little as possible, and, since workers are also customers, I'm a little confused about how workers determine the value of their labor.

Possibly you would benefit by thinking of economics as the study of social creation and social distribution of society's resources?
Macroeconomics

capital
noun (1)

Definition of capital (Entry 2 of 3)

1a(1) : a stock of accumulated goods especially at a specified time and in contrast to income received during a specified period also : the value of these accumulated goods

(2) : accumulated goods devoted to the production of other goods

(3) : accumulated possessions calculated to bring in income set capital and land and labor to work— G. B. Shaw
b(1) : net worth : excess of assets over liabilities

(2) : stock sense 2a
c : persons holding capital : capitalists considered as a group
d : advantage, gain make capital of the situation
e : a store of useful assets or advantages wasted

Capital can be anything of value. An asset is capital. For example if you own a car, a car is an asset of value. If you own a car, you are capitalist.

You can use that car, to make money. For example every uber driver, is using the capital of their car, to create more income.

So, if you own a house, you are capitalist. If you have a 401K, you are a capitalist. If you have a car, you are a capitalist. You can even make the case, that just by owning your own labor, and selling that labor to the highest bidder, makes you a capitalist.

Capitalists typically pay workers they employ as little as possible, and, since workers are also customers, I'm a little confused about how workers determine the value of their labor.

Workers can be customers at the same time, but they still don't determine the value of their own labor. They determine the value of the labor they are purchasing.

And this isn't a hard concept. Again, say you own a car. Your car needs an oil change. Do you not shop around to find an oil change for the price you are willing to pay?

Yes, I wager you do. We all do. I could take my car to the expensive dealership, and pay nearly $55 to $70. Or I can go to a small shop, and have it done for $25. I can even find a backyard mechanic, and pay him $15.

Well... unsurprisingly, the dealership oil change guys are paid pretty darn good. The small independent shops, are paid significantly less. And a backyard guy makes a few bucks.

By my action of shopping around as a customer, I am determining the value of the labor I am willing to pay for.

That doesn't change the fact that my own labor is also determined by the customers. Just like I make choices on how much I am willing to pay for labor, so are people making choices on how much they are willing to pay for my labor.

Not hard to see how this works.

By the way... yes capitalists pay the lowest price they can for labor. You do to. If someone offered to do an oil change for $5..... you would do that. I promise you, that you would, and so would everyone.

You shop around for the best deal, just like we all do.

 

[Andylusion]

Compared to the gulag.......we're slackers, eh comrade?

No one locks up disposable people better than capitalists, Rube.

School-to-prison pipeline - Wikipedia

"In the United States, the school-to-prison pipeline (SPP), also known as the school-to-prison link or the schoolhouse-to-jailhouse track, is the disproportionate tendency of minors and young adults from disadvantaged backgrounds to become incarcerated, because of increasingly harsh school and municipal policies."

that's because people are committing crimes. You know who doesn't send people to prison? Countries in anarchy. Enjoy somalia, if you don't want criminals in prison.

Look at California. They are about as left-wing as you can get, and they are releasing people from prison, to avoid people like you saying they lock everyone up.

How's that working for them? Crime is drastically increasing in California.

I don't understand how anyone, even left-wingers, can support letting criminals continue to commit crime.

 

[sparky]

No society can stay healthy for too long with either a Command or Free Market Economy.

in other words, lack of restraint allows the big dog to eat all the small dogs....

Iceland not only did not implode, but they recovered faster, and were recording great economic growth, while we were still in a recession.

Iceland jailed the very sorts we gave bailouts to

Sub-prime loans were almost 25% of the market by the end. And you'll notice, as I said before, that sub-prime loans were a niche market before 1997, when Bill Clinton, and his administration pushed Sub-prime loans into the main stream

Glass Steagal was a huge windfall for the banksters
that is why we , 20 years after Clinton's rescinding of it, assumed the bubble

Again, government forced banks to make bad loans, and rewarded sub-prime loans, and encourages sub-prime loans by giving them a AAA rating. This is well documented.

man , you've got this backasswards

banksters own governance , not the other way round.....

In a free market, can companies suddenly leave a nation in droves leaving millions of people who cannot afford to start their own unemployed?
Should legislation allow this to occur?

We howled like hell over nafta, and quite frankly Perot was right....

Neo-Conservatism aka Ayn Rand, as opposed to Conservatism, does not produce a steady economy.
Neo-Conservatism is like cocaine.

Randism is quite the study , but let's be honest ,she was a Marxist from day one on a mission here

~S~

 

[Indeependent]

No society can stay healthy for too long with either a Command or Free Market Economy.

in other words, lack of restraint allows the big dog to eat all the small dogs....

Iceland not only did not implode, but they recovered faster, and were recording great economic growth, while we were still in a recession.

Iceland jailed the very sorts we gave bailouts to

Sub-prime loans were almost 25% of the market by the end. And you'll notice, as I said before, that sub-prime loans were a niche market before 1997, when Bill Clinton, and his administration pushed Sub-prime loans into the main stream

Glass Steagal was a huge windfall for the banksters
that is why we , 20 years after Clinton's rescinding of it, assumed the bubble

Again, government forced banks to make bad loans, and rewarded sub-prime loans, and encourages sub-prime loans by giving them a AAA rating. This is well documented.

man , you've got this backasswards

banksters own governance , not the other way round.....

In a free market, can companies suddenly leave a nation in droves leaving millions of people who cannot afford to start their own unemployed?
Should legislation allow this to occur?

We howled like hell over nafta, and quite frankly Perot was right....

Neo-Conservatism aka Ayn Rand, as opposed to Conservatism, does not produce a steady economy.
Neo-Conservatism is like cocaine.

Randism is quite the study , but let's be honest ,she was a Marxist from day one on a mission here

~S~

I was kicking AndyLoser's ass so bad he put me on Ignore.

Every neo-Con is the Marxist with your assets.

 

[georgephillip]

that's because people are committing crimes. You know who doesn't send people to prison? Countries in anarchy. Enjoy somalia, if you don't want criminals in prison

Most inmates in US prisons have never had a trial; they were railroaded by a Justice system that is so badly underfunded (because rich capitalists refuse to pay taxes) most defendants who can't afford a good lawyer opt for a plea bargain instead of facing a jury of their peers.

The fact that many of these defendants come from communities ravaged by globalization should tell why politicians like Trump and Biden feel the need to portray themselves as crime fighters when their efforts serve the biggest felons on the planet.

The Felon: JP Morgan Chase Latest Act is to Hide More Information Becoming More Secretive

 

[Indeependent]

that's because people are committing crimes. You know who doesn't send people to prison? Countries in anarchy. Enjoy somalia, if you don't want criminals in prison

Most inmates in US prisons have never had a trial; they were railroaded by a Justice system that is so badly underfunded (because rich capitalists refuse to pay taxes) most defendants who can't afford a good lawyer opt for a plea bargain instead of facing a jury of their peers.

The fact that many of these defendants come from communities ravaged by globalization should tell why politicians like Trump and Biden feel the need to portray themselves as crime fighters when their efforts serve the biggest felons on the planet.

The Felon: JP Morgan Chase Latest Act is to Hide More Information Becoming More Secretive

On the other hand, well over 90% of cases are settled out of court,
I used to work out with a guy who was a NYS Narc and over 90% of those caught red handed never spent a minute behind bars.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Yes, because you did not make any real points.

Because Obama didn't have to bail out the world. That is opinion. That is not a fact. It's opinion. We didn't bail out Lehman Brothers. It didn't doom the world.

Now I get it that banks claimed Obama had to bail out the world.... well of course they did. Those CEOs jobs are to save the company. If the only way to save the company is to get money from government, they are going to go to government ask for money.

And if the only way to convince government to give you money, is to claim that if you don't bail them out, that the world will end... then they are going to say you have to bail us out or the world will end.

But it's not true. That's just a bunch of rich people, saying whatever they have to say, to get cash.

No, Obama didn't have to bail out the world. The world would have been just fine, with zero bailouts. Iceland didn't bailout a single bank, and their big three banks that all failed, were a far larger percentage of their economy, then our banks were.

Iceland not only did not implode, but they recovered faster, and were recording great economic growth, while we were still in a recession.

Estonia years ago, also refused to bailout their banks, and their banks all went bankrupt and closed, and they recovered just fine, no problem.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Because my videos are directly relevant to the topic at hand. Milton Friedman was not relevant to the topic at hand.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Because that is not true?

Sub-prime loans were almost 25% of the market by the end. And you'll notice, as I said before, that sub-prime loans were a niche market before 1997, when Bill Clinton, and his administration pushed Sub-prime loans into the main stream.

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

People are always going to invest in ways that make a profit. People are going to invest in ways to make a profit, whether the economy is good, or the economy is bad.

Complaining that people made a profit, is pointless. They are always going to make a profit. That's like complaining it's sunny in Arizona, during a depression. Yeah, that's going to happen.

The question isn't "did people make a profit during....." We always answer that with.... yeah. That's what investors do. Investors make wise investments, that return a profit. They would not be investors, if they didn't make investments that returned a profit.

I myself, am an investor. In 2009, I was buying stocks even while the market was crashing. That's what wise investors do.

Even this year. When the market crashed back on Feb 20th, I started buying stocks. I've been buying stocks on the market since the beginning of this crash too. Because that's how you make wise investments, is by buying up stocks that are on sale.

So that is not a valid point. Pointing out that wise investors were investing wisely during the sub-prime crash, is not a valid point of anything. That's like saying "duh". Yeah, investors invested. Duh.

The only valid question is, why did sub-prime loans go from being a niche market, where they should have stayed... to being mainstream and taking up almost 1/4th of the market?

The answer is.... government. Freddie Mac in 1997, signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, to give Sub-prime mortgages a AAA rating.

Bear Stearns, the CRA, and Freddie Mac - Cafe Hayek

I keep hearing that the subprime crisis was caused by people willing to buy stuff they couldn't evaluate. Why would smart people do that? One answer is that they were stupid. In an era of rising home prices, it's hard...

cafehayek.com

CHARLOTTE – First Union Capital Markets Corp. and Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. have priced a $384.6 million offering of securities backed by Community Reinvestment​

Act (CRA) loans – marking the industry’s first public securitization of​

CRA loans.​

​

The affordable mortgages were originated or acquired by First Union​

Corporation and subsidiaries. Customers will experience no impact –​

they will continue to make payments to and be serviced by First Union​

Mortgage Corp. CRA loans are loans targeted to low and moderate income​

borrowers and neighborhoods under the Community Reinvestment Act of​

1977.​

​

"The securitization of these affordable mortgages allows us to redeploy​

capital back into our communities and to expand our ability to provide​

credit to low and moderate income individuals," said Jane Henderson,​

managing director of First Union’s Community Reinvestment and Fair​

Lending Programs. "First Union is committed to promoting home ownership​

in traditionally underserved markets through a comprehensive line of​

competitive and flexible affordable mortgage products. This transaction​

enables us to continue to aggressively serve those markets."​

​

The $384.6 million in senior certificates are guaranteed by Freddie Mac and​

have an implied "AAA" rating. First Union Capital Markets Corp. is the​

investment banking subsidiary of First Union Corporation.​

Again, this is well documented.

And at the same time, Andrew Cuomo was suing banks to force them to make bad loans.



Andrew Cuomo admitted openly, that this would force the bank to make loans to people who otherwise would not qualify. Meaning, people who did not qualify for prime rate mortgages.... AND Cuomo equally admitted that the default rate would be higher.

Again, government forced banks to make bad loans, and rewarded sub-prime loans, and encourages sub-prime loans by giving them a AAA rating. This is well documented.

Iceland didn't bailout a single bank, and their big three banks that all failed, were a far larger percentage of their economy, then our banks were.

What they did was screw all the foreign depositors in their banks.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

 

[Indeependent]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

 

[Indeependent]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

We went over this several years ago and so did Lou Dobbs...ad nauseum.
I'm sure Lou has a YouTube video explaining how the Lenders got away with murder.

To paraphrase Dobbs...
US Banks sold some derivative crap to Europe and Asia.
We owed some institutions money and we fell a penny short and they said...We want $1,00, not $.99; pay up or default.
We defaulted.
It was a long time ago and I don't remember every box of the flow chart...but selling instruments with massive holes in them didn't quite make the same music as a whole instrument.

The CDO market after the crash was many times larger than the one during the crash, but I presume the instruments sold actually had 100% value.

The issue is it will happen again and neither Party will stop it.

 

[Indeependent]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

You'be bringing back bad memories...
Lenders lend to anyone.
At least 1/2 will default within a year.

Are the Lenders selling those mortgages to any non-US institutions?

Seriously, do we need C19 and a mortgage breakdown at the same time?

On the other hand, the Lenders will blame C19 for the foreclosures.

 

[Indeependent]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

Ace Greenberg...a memory returning. Something about not being able to pay out a claim and going out of business?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

We went over this several years ago and so did Lou Dobbs...ad nauseum.
I'm sure Lou has a YouTube video explaining how the Lenders got away with murder.

To paraphrase Dobbs...
US Banks sold some derivative crap to Europe and Asia.
We owed some institutions money and we fell a penny short and they said...We want $1,00, not $.99; pay up or default.
We defaulted.
It was a long time ago and I don't remember every box of the flow chart...but selling instruments with massive holes in them didn't quite make the same music as a whole instrument.

The CDO market after the crash was many times larger than the one during the crash, but I presume the instruments sold actually had 100% value.

The issue is it will happen again and neither Party will stop it.

To paraphrase Dobbs...
US Banks sold some derivative crap to Europe and Asia.

You mean crappy mortgages?

We owed some institutions money and we fell a penny short and they said...We want $1,00, not $.99; pay up or default.

We? We who? Owed which institutions?

but selling instruments with massive holes in them didn't quite make the same music as a whole instrument.

Yes, Clinton forcing Fannie and Freddie to buy 50% of their mortgages from the shit end of the pool and then Bush increasing the requirement to 55% was a really stupid idea.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

You'be bringing back bad memories...
Lenders lend to anyone.
At least 1/2 will default within a year.

Are the Lenders selling those mortgages to any non-US institutions?

Seriously, do we need C19 and a mortgage breakdown at the same time?

On the other hand, the Lenders will blame C19 for the foreclosures.

Lenders lend to anyone.
At least 1/2 will default within a year.

If half your mortgages default within 6 months, you're gonna get stuck with a bunch of crap.

Are the Lenders selling those mortgages to any non-US institutions?

Some did. I don't know how much.....dollar wise. Do you?

On the other hand, the Lenders will blame C19 for the foreclosures.

And in a lot of cases, they'll be right.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

Ace Greenberg...a memory returning. Something about not being able to pay out a claim and going out of business?

Ace Greenberg...a memory returning.

Bear Stearns? They went under because they had a huge, I mean HUGE, bond portfolio, including mortgages, that they financed with overnight loans.

Cheaper than longer term loans, but when liquidity goes away, you're fucked.

 

[Indeependent]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

We went over this several years ago and so did Lou Dobbs...ad nauseum.
I'm sure Lou has a YouTube video explaining how the Lenders got away with murder.

To paraphrase Dobbs...
US Banks sold some derivative crap to Europe and Asia.
We owed some institutions money and we fell a penny short and they said...We want $1,00, not $.99; pay up or default.
We defaulted.
It was a long time ago and I don't remember every box of the flow chart...but selling instruments with massive holes in them didn't quite make the same music as a whole instrument.

The CDO market after the crash was many times larger than the one during the crash, but I presume the instruments sold actually had 100% value.

The issue is it will happen again and neither Party will stop it.

To paraphrase Dobbs...
US Banks sold some derivative crap to Europe and Asia.

You mean crappy mortgages?

We owed some institutions money and we fell a penny short and they said...We want $1,00, not $.99; pay up or default.

We? We who? Owed which institutions?

but selling instruments with massive holes in them didn't quite make the same music as a whole instrument.

Yes, Clinton forcing Fannie and Freddie to buy 50% of their mortgages from the shit end of the pool and then Bush increasing the requirement to 55% was a really stupid idea.

There's about 40 guys in my Town and, embarrassingly enough, in my house of worship, that had their asses handed to them for Rubber Stamping Loans that the software denied.
And it didn't matter what Party they aligned with.
They got their fees and commissions and later got busted (fired).
They all were gainfully employed within 3 months at the same or higher salaries.

I vaguely remember we sold those bad instruments to foreign banks that came back when Americans stopped paying their mortgages and the foreign banks told us to go somewhere when we tried to sell them the next thing to keep the cash flowing.

I was Rubber Stamped; well, not me, the piece of paper.

The bottom line is that no one in power should coerce anyone to Rubber Stamp what the software Denied.

As I think more about it, and you make me think more about it in 2020 than I did several years ago, Clinton probably did push Fannie and Freddie to have Lenders Rubber Stamp the Loans.

 

[Indeependent]

I can tell you from professional experience that "GW's" Housing Bubble and Crash are going to occur again.

I can tell you the dregs of society , god's 'special children' ie corn-struction workers are all expecting a crash Indeep

I know for a fact that these people earn in the lower 20-30Ks and I am convinced that the Lenders are Rubber Stamping these Loans "Approved".
Just as in the GW years, there is no way the Tables in the software provided by the Municipalities, States and Federal levels of Government are allowing people who work in Pizza Shops to take out Home Equity Loads in the 600K range.

a recipe for another housing disaster

Everybody loves a great economy, but everyone wants to jump aboard before they're capable of earning and paying their own way.

true, but don't you sense the constant revaluation via fiscals such as the derivatives market a factor InDeep?

~S~

Institutional Trading should be Illegal.
I'm tired of egotistical assholes with a bullshit degree in Finance from a "prestigious" University that their daddy's bribe got them into, determining from thin air how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.
HOW THE FUCK DO THEY KNOW????
It's a fucking game that they never lose at!

I explained it last week to a naive person here who wants to believe all people on Wall Street are honest.

I will now calm down...nah!

how a much a given piece of a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION, with an almost infinite amount of physical Assets & Liabilities alone, is worth at any given second.

If they're overpricing it, don't buy from them.
If they're underpricing it, don't sell to them.

I get the impression you were on the up and up.
Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.
Are investors really pulling in and out of the same deal all day long?
No way.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

In fact, with today's technology, crashes should never happen because we found out something that happened last year was suddenly discovered.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Not so the Institutional Traders who are baiting the small guy.

Again... as I pointed out before, your 401K is run by institutional traders. Union pension funds, are run by institutional traders. The trust fund of schools like Yale and Harvard, are run by institutional traders. Annuities for old people retiring, are run by institutional traders.

Basically every single retirement, or investment program in the world, is run by institutional traders.

The small guy.... benefits specifically from institutional traders. I've doubled my money in the stock market, through an IRA..... run by institutional traders.

The Market rides like a roller coaster all day long...there's no way that would happen if the data being fed to the masses were honest.

Of course it would go up and down, with or without accurate information.

Just like there are hundreds of factors involved in the value of a stock, there are also hundreds of factors involved in investor choices.

Simple example: Had an idiot years ago, who during the sub-prime crash, sold all his stocks. He was convinced, the market was going to completely tank, and he was going to magically lose all his money.

So he sold all his stocks.

I on the other hand, I bought every single stock I could buy. Every single spare dollar I could grab, I purchased stocks with it.

The information we had was identical. He didn't have any more information than I did, and I didn't have any more information than him. Yet both of us had completely opposite reactions to the market.

Warren Buffet supposedly said (I've heard this from multiple sources, but I still can't confirm it), when he was asked by a reporter how much money he lost in the Sub-prime stock market crash, responded "None. I didn't sell my stocks".

So you have 3 different people, and each had different reactions to the same exact information. One guy sold all his stocks (which would drive prices down), one guy bought every stock he could be (which would drive prices up), and one guy did absolutely nothing.

Do you see the problem with your logic? You act like if everyone had perfect information, that we'd all do the exact same thing, and the market would be completely static.

Not so. People react differently to perfect information all the time.

So.... No. The market should naturally go up and down, constantly. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

It's like a big flashing advertisement, but when it fails, it destroys an entire economy.

Um... no. The stock market reflects the economy. Not the other way around. A stock market crash, can't somehow magically cause the economy to crash.

Just think about that logically for a moment. Say you are a company, like oh.... Apple Computer. Say the stock market hits a bump and crashes.

How does that affect you?

It doesn't. If people are still buying iPhones, you are still going to sell them. If people are still buying your computers, you are still going to sell them. If products are still being sold, you are still going to have them made.

How does the dropping of your stock price, cause Apple computer, or any other company you might work for, have any problems? It doesn't.

Let's take the 1929 Crash. Did that crash cause any companies to go under? No. In fact, the unemployment rate in 1929, even after the stock market crash, was still just 3%.

But why did the stock market crash? Because investors saw that Smoot Hawley tariffs were going to cash business to crash. In 1930, the Smoot Hawley tariff was imposed, and unemployment from all those businesses forced back into the US (that was sarcasm) jumped up to 8.7%. Then you had the dust bowl, unemployment hit 15%, and the Hoover tax increases to pay for all the government programs, and unemployment hit 23%, and then FDR's new deal, and unemployment hit 24%.

Historical US Unemployment Rate by Year

The unemployment rate has fluctuated greatly since 1929. Learn how GDP, inflation, economic events, and other policies have historically impacted unemployment.

www.thebalance.com

Again, did the crash in 1929 cause businesses to close? No. It was the Smoot-Hawley protectionism that caused businesses to close. The investors saw that coming, that's why the stock crash happened in 1929, when the bill to impose protectionism was introduced.

But none of the economic decline happened after the stock market crash. It happened as tariffs and retaliatory tariffs were placed against the US, which killed the economy, and people lost their jobs.

The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash.

You are trying to put the cart in front of the horse.

Just look at the Housing Crash...who didn't really know the Loans were BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!
But everybody's got a dream.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?

Government didn't know the loans were bad. They pushed bad loans, throughout the entire sub-prime bubble.

Uh huh...Yeah.
By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

Who didn't know the loans were bad? Government. You want me to post videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank saying that everything was great? You want me to post the news articles where Freddie Mac signed a deal with First Union (wachovia) and Bear Stearns, two of the largest crashes.... to make bad sub-prime loans?
Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans. You really do live in Kansas, don't you?
Half of the Lenders in my community were hired by the Obama Administration to investigate these Papers stamped "Approved" because they were among the few Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

"The stock market reacted to future implications. It didn't cause anything. Stock markets do not "cause" the economy to fail. The future information that the economy would fail, caused the markets to crash."
I hope you're kidding...Stock markets can, and have, turned wealthy people into paupers in mere moments.
In fact, this happened a few months before Trump's tax cuts.

Or how about Obama who said openly, that sub-prime loans were a good idea?
You didn't listen to Rush back then, did you?
Rush loved sub-prime Loans and claimed the GW was a genius!
The Loans themselves were only a fraction of the issue as nobody cares if minorities lose their home and wind up homeless.
After all, there were no Smart Devices back then to storm Wall Street and hand the MBAs.
The Rubber Stamped Loans were packed into other projects, almost all doomed to fail, and then sold to Financial Firms in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Why? Because no firm here cared if a Bank in Asia could collect on the loan because the bankers here would conjure up another scheme to raise that money.

But Whitey made a mistake which I understood because I was taking Karate and understood the Asian mentality...
You owe me $1.00 this month, I'm not accepting $.99.
Sounds funny, doesn't it, but Asians back then, before we tainted them, work on real numbers, not American vapor.

I could go on but you already bought the Rush Limbaugh horse crap.

GW, The Rs and the Ds and every Financial Firm in the US caused a deficit that will never be paid off.
But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.
You're so Lilly White...
Send your bank account and every check you get to the Fed.
But I work for my check!
You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

Look, you're a really smart guy but so damned Yankee Doodle.
Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

By the way, The Great Depression, as defined by Milton Freidman in one of his last videos, was caused by excessive off-shoring of assets and the lack of technology to know those assets were wasted on parties. Yep, MF says it and every Conservative who hears that sentence blocks it out because Conservatives are just as mentally ill as Liberals.

Thomas Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

Thomas Rustici of George Mason University and author of Lessons from the Great Depression talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the impact of the Smoot-Hawley Act on the economy. The standard view is that the decrease in trade that followed Smoot-Hawley was not big enough to be a...

www.econtalk.org

Economist Rustici, clearly documents the effects of the Smoot Hawley tariff, and how it caused the crash. One clear example, is the Pittsburgh steel industry. The Smoot Hawley tariff, drastically increased the cost of raw iron ore from Canada. Of course Canada equally put in place a retaliatory tariff against steel imported from the US.

Do tell sparky... if you were a steel company, which would cause you more problems: A drop in your company stock price, or the price of your raw steel going up dramatically at the exact same time the price of your finished product steel dropping dramatically?

The rest of your comments are pure nonsense as you have not spent any time in any Wall Street firm at a meeting attended and run by 20 MBAs who didn't care about anything else other than selling an idea or an actual product, regardless of the viability of the product.

That is not a counter argument to anything I said.

Grow up already; every Loan Officer Rubber Stamped Loans.

Does not change anything I said. Not a counter argument to anything.
Again, if you want me to post the videos of Maxine Waters, and Barnie Frank both praising sub-prime loans, and Obama calling it a good idea, and Andrew Cuomo suing banks to make bad loans.... I will do so. But your statement, changes nothing.

Lenders who followed the Government provided software that Rejected the Loan; these Lenders lost their careers because there weren't enough Borrowers who listened to their advice and buy a less expensive home.

Robot Check

John A. Allison was CEO of BB&T bank, when regulators under the Clinton administration showed up, and required that they lower lending standards.

This is well documented.

But Obama!..Saved you from starving by borrowing against the future.

Bull crap. A number of countries did not bailout out their banks, and were just fine.

Plus, Obama was part of the group pushing sub-prime loans to being with. Only a brainless idiot, sees someone create a problem, and then present themselves as a solution to a problem they created, and claim they saved us.

You are dumbest moron on the face of the planet, if you honestly believe that.

You know why your boss has a business?
Obama borrowed against the future.
I was there, I saw business owners begging the banks for a penny!

My boss was not there. Nor did anything that created that company, or the products that company sold, ever come from Obama.

I could write a book on your delusions, but what the heck, every RWer in my community still denies this GW farce.

My delusions? Which one of us right now, is sitting around justifying government taking your tax money, and giving it to wealthy people?

Stop responding to what you consider nonsense (since you weren't there and can only rely on Fox and The Wall Street Journal of Bullshit for your knowledge base).

Well because I'm right. I know I'm right. You are wrong, and I can prove it. So why should I stop responding, when you are the one making insane claims?

Just out of curiosity, do you realize you didn't directly address anything I posted?

Why do you mention Europe when the I stated Obama had to bail out the world.

Why are you referencing some other video when MFs video is on YouTube?

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Not to mention that the men who engineered the entire Lending Bubble, Alan Greenspan, Dick Cheney and Warren Buffet, made billions off the crash.

To be honest, you are so honest I wish you would run for office.

Why are you blaming sub-primer loans alone when they were less than 3% of the crash?

Link?

That was a quote from Rush's radio show when I was a big Rush fan.
There were some people at the time criticizing GW about a Bubble and Rush was saying the economy was on super solid ground.
Rush said that knowing factories were leaving the US in droves.
You know Rush, being fired is an opportunity even when 100K people with your exact skill set are being fired simultaneously,

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Anyway, it was the CDOs that did it.

Did what?

You'be bringing back bad memories...
Lenders lend to anyone.
At least 1/2 will default within a year.

Are the Lenders selling those mortgages to any non-US institutions?

Seriously, do we need C19 and a mortgage breakdown at the same time?

On the other hand, the Lenders will blame C19 for the foreclosures.

Lenders lend to anyone.
At least 1/2 will default within a year.

If half your mortgages default within 6 months, you're gonna get stuck with a bunch of crap.

Are the Lenders selling those mortgages to any non-US institutions?

Some did. I don't know how much.....dollar wise. Do you?

On the other hand, the Lenders will blame C19 for the foreclosures.

And in a lot of cases, they'll be right.

There's a dangerous underpinning to the success of Trump economy.
Many Hood areas are doing quite well but I see way too many people in the really poor areas building million dollar homes.

 

[sparky]

I don't support capitalism or any version of communism (state capitalism) that has so far been practiced; why do you automatically assume anyone critical of finance capitalism supports Soviet-style communism?

because what we have favors the oligarchs , just as it does thier system

I vaguely remember we sold those bad instruments to foreign banks that came back when Americans stopped paying their mortgages and the foreign banks told us to go somewhere when we tried to sell them the next thing to keep the cash flowing.

Credit derivatives , credit default swaps, all of which are predicated on the transfer of risk , or in other words ,profit when something fails.

As I think more about it, and you make me think more about it in 2020 than I did several years ago, Clinton probably did push Fannie and Freddie to have Lenders Rubber Stamp the Loans.

the rescinding of Glass Steagal , which was created to protect public banking from investment banking ........
basically the fractional banking system 's integrity was thrown under the wall street bus in the late 90's

FF to '08, '09 and that bubble created the housing bust, where Joe bag O donuts mortgage quadrupled overnight

That fine print , always a b*tch

But the myth of 45 million Americans waking up wanting to be welfare queen foreclosure bums persists

And the chief proponents who advocated the rescinding where appointed to the 'banking commission' to whitewash it all for their constituency

POINT? the house never looses in a rigged economy

~S~

 

[sparky]

I don't understand how anyone, even left-wingers, can support letting criminals continue to commit crime.

You do understand then, that locking up the the law abiding work force, while allowing prisoners freedom is just as wrong then?

~S~