Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I guess I can see that, but to me there's no excuse for not regulating such an opaque security. I can see that politicians wouldn't want to rock the boat while the going is good, but goddamn, that's the job of regulators regardless.Well, no one thought real estate could drop. Go figure.Sure, agreed, and I deal with that crap daily.The Democrats seem to think that MORE regulation equates with BETTER regulation.
The Republicans seem to think that markets can police themselves, completely ignoring the Meltdown.
Madness.
.
There is a difference between total anarchy in the market and a moderated market. Moderation, i.e. regulation should be designed to make the market fair and transparent, not to make it impossible to provide a given transaction, or bury it in a sea of paper that requires a staff of 50 just to figure out if you are in compliance or not.
But on the other side, the "securities" at the heart of the Meltdown were largely opaque and unregulated. Greenspan had the power to regulate them and chose not to, even though he himself admitted that he had studied MBS's and CDO's and didn't understand them.
.
The MBS and CDO situation was unique in that while everything was going good, no one got hurt, and everyone made money or got some advantage. The investors made money, the investment banks made money, the default swap insurers made money, the people buying houses with crappy credit got houses they couldn't ordinarily get, the ease of credit got people higher prices for the houses they were selling, and finally government made all sorts of tax money, be it from higher incomes, higher property taxes, and higher sales taxes.
Could better regulation have prevented it? I'm not sure it could have unless it banned the entire concept, and at that point, no one hand any idea they could be that destructive if they failed.
But hell, the ratings agencies were whoring out AAA's, no one cared about the insane mortgages being offered, no one knew what was in the MBS/CDO's, AIG was writing zillions in swaps without any required reserves, on and on. That's the Old West, and we paid for it.
.
The best they could have done was set limits to the default swap rates and limit the investment vehicles to only prime mortgages. The limits on swap coverage would have been fought tooth an nail by the free market people, and the limits on investment to prime mortgages only would be fought be the "housing for everyone" people, and that covers both sides of the political aisle.
Again, until the markets went down, no one was getting hurt. There was no impetus for regulation from any side of the political divide.
You think Trump's doing this for his health?LOL I love how you go along with this. So disingenuousThe return of the robber barons
The return of the robber barons
See my sig. Robber barrons are exponentially better than the progressive statist doo gooders who want to use government to shape the rest of us to their interests.
Trump is so left wing. Totally going after the parasites at the top, instead of picking on people at the bottom.
Why do conservatives view fucking people over as a sign of success?Neither wolves nor shepherds, but competent, successful people.Trump has hired/nominated wolves, not shepherds.
Good news. The SEC will be headed by some one who understands both sides of the issues.Trump to tap Wall Street lawyer, Jay Clayton, to head SEC
Clayton is a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, a well-known law firm, and has represented some of the biggest names on Wall Street, including Goldman Sachs and Barclays, and helped them weather regulatory scrutiny. He has also helped large companies hold their raise money through an initial public offering, including Alibaba, the Chinese retail giant. But, according to the biography on the Sullivan & Cromwell website, Clayton has not held any government positions and has never served as a prosecutor.
The next 4-8 years are going to be hilarious.
What are Democrats always so hostile to competent people?
And his trailer dwelling rubes CheerThe return of the robber barons
And his trailer dwelling rubes CheerThe return of the robber barons
We get to laugh as the republic collapses. All you get to do since you voted for it is squirm as it happens you embarrassing rube. LOLAnd his trailer dwelling rubes CheerThe return of the robber barons
And his detractors jeer. LOL
Trump won. Hillary lost. Get over it. Or not. LOL
We get to laugh as the republic collapses. All you get to do since you voted for it is squirm as it happens you embarrassing rube. LOLAnd his trailer dwelling rubes CheerThe return of the robber barons
And his detractors jeer. LOL
Trump won. Hillary lost. Get over it. Or not. LOL
Lol Trump will be a success.....We get to laugh as the republic collapses. All you get to do since you voted for it is squirm as it happens you embarrassing rube. LOLAnd his trailer dwelling rubes CheerThe return of the robber barons
And his detractors jeer. LOL
Trump won. Hillary lost. Get over it. Or not. LOL
If Trump is a success you won't have to worry about the collapse of the Republic.
Oh and I think he will be more than successful.
Trump won. Hillary lost. Get over it. Or not. LOL
Why do liberals always think successful people must have fucked people over?Why do conservatives view fucking people over as a sign of success?Neither wolves nor shepherds, but competent, successful people.Trump has hired/nominated wolves, not shepherds.
Not every successful person is a parasite. Some like Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, etc actually revolutionized their industries. However, compared to upper level corporate officers and Wall Street types, they are as rare as hen's teeth. Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite don't actually produce anything directly. They divert profits from productive individuals and enterprises into their own hands. Those are the types of people we're talking about in Trump's cabinet.Why do liberals always think successful people must have fucked people over?Why do conservatives view fucking people over as a sign of success?Neither wolves nor shepherds, but competent, successful people.Trump has hired/nominated wolves, not shepherds.
lol "Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite" are the people who build and finance the economy. The politicians who rant about them are the parasites who live off of what these "Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite" have built.Not every successful person is a parasite. Some like Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, etc actually revolutionized their industries. However, compared to upper level corporate officers and Wall Street types, they are as rare as hen's teeth. Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite don't actually produce anything directly. They divert profits from productive individuals and enterprises into their own hands. Those are the types of people we're talking about in Trump's cabinet.Why do liberals always think successful people must have fucked people over?Why do conservatives view fucking people over as a sign of success?Neither wolves nor shepherds, but competent, successful people.Trump has hired/nominated wolves, not shepherds.
Bwahahaha, good one! Corporate types generally specialize in self promotion and then when they reach a level where they might have some impact, the most creative things they can think to do are to outsource, move jobs overseas and downsize. Wall Street types are a special kind of parasite because they have to hire engineers to come up with ever more sophisticated 'products' to rip people off (they're not bright enough to do it themselves). So which are you?lol "Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite" are the people who build and finance the economy. The politicians who rant about them are the parasites who live off of what these "Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite" have built.Not every successful person is a parasite. Some like Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, etc actually revolutionized their industries. However, compared to upper level corporate officers and Wall Street types, they are as rare as hen's teeth. Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite don't actually produce anything directly. They divert profits from productive individuals and enterprises into their own hands. Those are the types of people we're talking about in Trump's cabinet.Why do liberals always think successful people must have fucked people over?Why do conservatives view fucking people over as a sign of success?Neither wolves nor shepherds, but competent, successful people.Trump has hired/nominated wolves, not shepherds.
The Democrats seem to think that MORE regulation equates with BETTER regulation.
The Republicans seem to think that markets can police themselves, completely ignoring the Meltdown.
Madness.
.
Are you trying to sound stupid? Do you really believe every President, every Congress for most of the nation's history was so currupt or incompetent that they would have allowed, often facilitated the operation or banks and corporations if all they did was rip off people? The entire global economy was built by industrialists and investment bankers.Bwahahaha, good one! Corporate types generally specialize in self promotion and then when they reach a level where they might have some impact, the most creative things they can think to do are to outsource, move jobs overseas and downsize. Wall Street types are a special kind of parasite because they have to hire engineers to come up with ever more sophisticated 'products' to rip people off (they're not bright enough to do it themselves). So which are you?lol "Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite" are the people who build and finance the economy. The politicians who rant about them are the parasites who live off of what these "Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite" have built.Not every successful person is a parasite. Some like Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, etc actually revolutionized their industries. However, compared to upper level corporate officers and Wall Street types, they are as rare as hen's teeth. Aggressive corporate types and the financial elite don't actually produce anything directly. They divert profits from productive individuals and enterprises into their own hands. Those are the types of people we're talking about in Trump's cabinet.Why do liberals always think successful people must have fucked people over?Why do conservatives view fucking people over as a sign of success?Neither wolves nor shepherds, but competent, successful people.
