The Battle Rages On: Class Warfare.

Windsblow · Mar 30, 2011

"But that is happening NOW due to lack of regulations. Look at the current state of our economy. We got rid of banking safe guards put in place after the 1929 stock market collapse. This made credit default swaps legal. Then mortgage banks and Wall St scammed us out of a ton of money and working class people's homes.

No of that would have been able to happen if it wasn't for deregulation."

Please.... were did you get this info? Oh...... wait every politician that want to regulate us claims this. It's all over the news. Fine you trust the people who becomes powerful through regulating you to regulate you. Makes sense.

The deregulation excuse is an oversimplification void of all the facts. The Stock market crash would not had happened without the mettling of the Government and it would had lasted only a few years (like in Europe) if the Government would had got out of the way.

As for your other comments...... I will pass. You can chase your own tail.

BudMcLovin · Mar 30, 2011

Dan Kone said:
But that is happening NOW due to lack of regulations. Look at the current state of our economy. We got rid of banking safe guards put in place after the 1929 stock market collapse. This made credit default swaps legal. Then mortgage banks and Wall St scammed us out of a ton of money and working class people's homes.

.

Yea the banks made those people take loans they couldn’t afford.

Windsblow · Mar 30, 2011

I have never understood why people lay so much trust in Government. It has always failed, oppressed, enslaved and murdered. I look to the individual and I trust men will, if left to their own free will, treat each other fairly and prosper as long as we believe in good principles of individualism and reject collectivist materialism. We have done it before, if for only a short period.

As for the heavely regulated commercial marijuana market and legal homegrown.... I don't think it would work. You ca'tn have a regulated and taxed market but allow people to freely produce their own tax free. One or the other will go. Government will not set up an revenue producing system without a guarentee there will be revenue to produce. Venture Capital will not flow into commercial marijuana markets without this guarentee also. The State will inevitable outlaw personal marijuana production with a simple tax stamp law Just like they did initially and how they did with moonshine. Felony Felony Felony. It will only put the money in pockets the black markets and the Corportion. People will still be dying over marijuana and the Goverment will rake in the revenue.

Unregulated Legalization is the only way.

Dan Kone · Mar 30, 2011

Windsblow said:
Please.... were did you get this info?

What info? Most of what I said is easy to find common knowledge. Credit default swaps were the backbone of the scam that crashed the economy. None of this could have happened before we deregulated banking.

I'm not sure what you think is suspect there. That is what happened. Proper regulations, trading supervision, and enforcement could have stopped it all from happening. Yet for some insane reason people think we need even less financial regulations. Guess some people never learn.

The deregulation excuse is an oversimplification void of all the facts. The Stock market crash would not had happened without the mettling of the Government and it would had lasted only a few years (like in Europe) if the Government would had got out of the way.

That is total fiction based on nothing. Look at the gramm-leech-bliley act and you'll see how too big to fail happened. Look at the commodity futures modernization act and you'll see how credit default swaps became deregulated, leading to the scam that caused the housing crisis.

This isn't opinion nor is it oversimplification void of facts. Deregulation IS the cause of the financial crisis. The information is out there in plain English.

As for your other comments...... I will pass. You can chase your own tail.

You entire post is made up of sweeping false generalizations containing no actual information, and yet that's exactly what you accuse me of even though I can cite the specific laws which prove my case.

fail

Windsblow · Mar 30, 2011

Dan Kone said:
What info? Most of what I said is easy to find common knowledge. Credit default swaps were the backbone of the scam that crashed the economy. None of this could have happened before we deregulated banking.

I'm not sure what you think is suspect there. That is what happened. Proper regulations, trading supervision, and enforcement could have stopped it all from happening. Yet for some insane reason people think we need even less financial regulations. Guess some people never learn.

That is total fiction based on nothing. Look at the gramm-leech-bliley act and you'll see how too big to fail happened. Look at the commodity futures modernization act and you'll see how credit default swaps became deregulated, leading to the scam that caused the housing crisis.

This isn't opinion nor is it oversimplification void of facts. Deregulation IS the cause of the financial crisis. The information is out there in plain English.

You entire post is made up of sweeping false generalizations containing no actual information, and yet that's exactly what you accuse me of even though I can cite the specific laws which prove my case.

fail

Some how you think writing to words "gramm-leech-bliley act" proves anything? The problem with "too big to fail" is the concept it's self. The fact that Government/SEC regulates, backs and insures shitty business deals, legal ponzi schemes and totally corrupt banking systems and doesn't allow them to fail. They just keep proping and proping and proping until the country is on the verge of collapse and then forces the tax payer to bail out these quasigovernment banks. It has nothing to do with deregulation. It has everything to do with not allowing the market to naturally weed out bad business. The Government want to play kingmaker because some people believe they are more powerful than nature (Congress).

Windsblow · Mar 30, 2011

Oh yeah one more point. Too big to fail was around long before Clinton. FDR bailedout plenty a bank and corporation.

Ernst · Mar 30, 2011

Credit Default Swaps had to get a Waver to be excluded from Gambling laws.

I kid you not.. It was in the same category as Las Vegas Black Jack and Slot Machines.
as we now know the odds were in the "Houses Favor" because someone made a lot of money taking the rest of us down.

By the way Credit Default Swaps are still with us and any country refusing to allow them in their country will be fined by the WTO for the amount of business the Swaps would have done theoretically.
So within each Nation the tools to destroy their economy exist as a tool for the WTO today.
WTO = World Trade Organization.

Dan Kone · Mar 30, 2011

Windsblow said:
Oh yeah one more point. Too big to fail was around long before Clinton. FDR bailedout plenty a bank and corporation.

....

Learn your history.

After solving the immediate problem FDR came up with a long term regulatory solution so that history couldn't repeat itself. The law was called Glass Steagall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act

Then in the 90's we removed those safe guards and repealed Glass Steagall with the Gramm-Leech-Bliley Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley_Act

That is how too big to fail happened. So yes, FDR did engage in bailouts. But then he immediately fixed the problem and we were good for the next 60 years. Then idiots pushed deregulation as a way to grow the economy resulting in economic collapse and too big to fail.

Dan Kone · Mar 30, 2011

BudMcLovin said:
Yea the banks made those people take loans they couldn’t afford.

Those mortgages wouldn't exist and banks wouldn't have made those loans if it wasn't for the deregulation of credit default swaps. The only reason banks made those loans in the first place is because they didn't care if people didn't pay them. They didn't care because after they made the loans they sold them to Wall St scammers who repackaged them and falsely sold as low risk investments.

Do you really think that should be legal and when the economy collapses because of it we should just blame the American people for falling for the scams made by mortgage banks and Wall St scammers?

That is utter stupidity. Blaming the American people doesn't solve the problem. Regulating banks and Wall St trading does solve the problem.

Dan Kone · Mar 30, 2011

Windsblow said:
Some how you think writing to words "gramm-leech-bliley act" proves anything?

Yes I do. That is the law which allowed these financial corporations to become so massive that they would collapse our economy if they failed.

The problem with "too big to fail" is the concept it's self.

Yeah, no shit.

The fact that Government/SEC regulates, backs and insures shitty business deals, legal ponzi schemes and totally corrupt banking systems and doesn't allow them to fail.

So you think we would have been better off if our financial system completely collapsed?

How is complete financial collapse preferable to just having better financial regulations? Why should American people lose their jobs just so we can protect the "free market"? The free market is just a theoretical concept. The American people are real human beings. Why should we protect that theoretical concept at the expense of human beings?

They just keep proping and proping and proping until the country is on the verge of collapse and then forces the tax payer to bail out these quasigovernment banks.

Which is why we had Glass-Steagall. So that wouldn't happen. Then conservatives pushed for deregulations and we were back to bailing out the financial industry.

It has nothing to do with deregulation.

It has everything to do with deregulation. You can regulate companies so they do not become too big to fail. You can regulate Wall St so they can not scam people with credit default swaps.

Yes, regulations solve those problems. Making the false claim that it has nothing to do with deregulation when it clearly does won't change that. Stating falsehoods doesn't change reality.

It has everything to do with not allowing the market to naturally weed out bad business.

Lulz? You just got done saying it has nothing to do with deregulation then you advocate deregulation as the solution. lol. ok then.

The Government want to play kingmaker because some people believe they are more powerful than nature (Congress)

Right. Because global economics is natural like a tree or a rainy day. yeah....

BudMcLovin · Mar 30, 2011

Dan Kone said:
Those mortgages wouldn't exist and banks wouldn't have made those loans if it wasn't for the deregulation of credit default swaps. The only reason banks made those loans in the first place is because they didn't care if people didn't pay them. They didn't care because after they made the loans they sold them to Wall St scammers who repackaged them and falsely sold as low risk investments.

Dan Kone said:
Do you really think that should be legal and when the economy collapses because of it we should just blame the American people for falling for the scams made by mortgage banks and Wall St scammers?

That is utter stupidity. Blaming the American people doesn't solve the problem. Regulating banks and Wall St trading does solve the problem.

The statement was made to make fun of you. You only want to place the blame on big business. Sure private industry played its part I have no problem admitting that. Why do you have a problem accepting the fact that government was a major player?

Why didn’t banks have to worry about people paying mortgages back? Oh yea the sold them to Freedie and Fanny, government organizations.

Spleefmeister · Mar 30, 2011

Hey, whatever happened to the liberal loon that threw this grenade in the first place?

Windsblow · Mar 30, 2011

Dan Kone said:
Yes I do. That is the law which allowed these financial corporations to become so massive that they would collapse our economy if they failed.

Yeah, no shit.

So you think we would have been better off if our financial system completely collapsed?

How is complete financial collapse preferable to just having better financial regulations? Why should American people lose their jobs just so we can protect the "free market"? The free market is just a theoretical concept. The American people are real human beings. Why should we protect that theoretical concept at the expense of human beings?

Which is why we had Glass-Steagall. So that wouldn't happen. Then conservatives pushed for deregulations and we were back to bailing out the financial industry.

It has everything to do with deregulation. You can regulate companies so they do not become too big to fail. You can regulate Wall St so they can not scam people with credit default swaps.

Yes, regulations solve those problems. Making the false claim that it has nothing to do with deregulation when it clearly does won't change that. Stating falsehoods doesn't change reality.

Lulz? You just got done saying it has nothing to do with deregulation then you advocate deregulation as the solution. lol. ok then.

Right. Because global economics is natural like a tree or a rainy day. yeah....

"YAWN"....... The statement that free markets are just theory is silly. "Free Market theory" has been backed by centuries of empirical data. Our whole World is based on Adam Smith's "theory" and the farther we move from these economic principles the worse the Civilized world gets. I'n summation.... I believe Capitalism, though not perfect, is far superior to other economic system and I believe history has my back on this one.

NoDrama · Mar 31, 2011

BudMcLovin said:
Yea the banks made those people take loans they couldn’t afford.

No, but many did take advantage of peoples ignorance in financial matters. only 1 in a 1000 knows how to amortize in their head, its super easy, but hardly anyone is ever taught. They don't teach you about money in school because they have designed it that way, money for most people is like a god they have 100% faith in and never question it.

Lets not forget that many of the largest banks committed thousands of acts of fraud when they started selling mortgages into securities but failed to comply with the many laws and they did it willingly and knowingly. Many knew for a fact that these securitized tranches of loans would fail, they were designed to fail. The banks that originally issued the loans were making huge bets against these instruments and making trillions on the foreclosures of others.

Windsblow · Mar 31, 2011

'"1 in a 1000 knows how to amortize in their head, its super easy, but hardly anyone is ever taught"

Uhhhhhhh....... OK mr. supercomputer dude. The mathmatical process by which an amortized loans is worked out is actually quite complicated. It is impossible to do it in your head.

canndo · Mar 31, 2011

NoDrama said:
If oil turns out to be abiotic, then yes it might actually be limitless. I mean think about how many dinosaurs it must have taken to provide millions of barrels a day, seems kind of far fetched.

In the several hundred years we have been extracting oil from the ground, reserves have not increased but decreased. Given this, even if oil is a "renewable" resource, it is not rapid enough to give us any benefit.

canndo · Mar 31, 2011

Windsblow said:
I do mean resources are limitless... The principles of supply and demand protects resources, and when what we use now becomes scarces, we will move to, invent and utilize other resources in a more efficient manner. We won't just starve to death or eat soilent green. Man will always have the ability to progresss and problem solve. Matter (resources) never dissapears it just changes forms. Dinosaurs and passenger pigeons are not needed and really never dissapeared they just changed forms.

Also, to the same point, when passenger pigeons dissapeared we didn't stop sending messages did we? Nope! infact, we devised a better more efficient and cheaper way to do the same job. Resources never ever run out. Just the patience and God given reasoning to let the market do it's job does.

The principle of entropy applies here - perhaps you are correct, but this does us no good as things go from more to less ordered imposing order costs more and more energy - this causes the same scarcity I have been talking about. What you are claiming is about the same as holding that perpetual motion actually works. It doesn't.

NoDrama · Mar 31, 2011

Windsblow said:
'"1 in a 1000 knows how to amortize in their head, its super easy, but hardly anyone is ever taught"

Uhhhhhhh....... OK mr. supercomputer dude. The mathmatical process by which an amortized loans is worked out is actually quite complicated. It is impossible to do it in your head.

You just proved my point even better than I could have with 2 pages of material.

NoDrama · Mar 31, 2011

canndo said:
In the several hundred years we have been extracting oil from the ground, reserves have not increased but decreased. Given this, even if oil is a "renewable" resource, it is not rapid enough to give us any benefit.

I never said it would.

Windsblow · Mar 31, 2011

NoDrama said:
You just proved my point even better than I could have with 2 pages of material.

Uh..... NIce try!

The Battle Rages On: Class Warfare.

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member