B-Large Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 From "Profile of a Progressive": "This progressive philosophy can be boiled down to one simple selfish character flaw on the part of Karl Marks and his followers; it all boils down to covetousness and envy. The progressive hates all who have succeeded on their own. The progressive has no faith in the individual to make his/her own decisions and certainly has no stomach for the consequences of free choice. The progressive lives by emotion and detests logic. The human brain is a powerful and amazing creation which gives the human being the power to reason and discern fact. The progressive thinks in bumper sticker statements which have emotional significance; however, when put to the test of logic or critical thinking, are easily debunked. The progressive cannot debate on factual issues and quickly spirals down into personal insults and worthless generalizations of racism, homophobia, and bigotry." Sounds like an "Occupier". Financial institutions made loans and bets of their free choice and got a bailout when the consequence came down... So Banks, Brokerage Houses and Insurance compaines are held harmless, but we look down on people exercising their protected right to protest crony capitalism? The Occupier's main shortcoming is they identify our current political climate and sitting president as agent of change in what we have in our economy today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <br />You mean because your spelling ability is so above average? <img src='http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br /><br /><br No, I am not a great speller. For the same reason you shouldn't take me seriously... Either should you this slept... What are they, a third grader. It is obvious this guy can't even the one person they right. Then again, I am on a Kindle and it is giving me fits... Autocorrect. <br /><br /><br /><br <br /><br />No, I am not a great speller. For the same reason you shouldn't take me seriously... Either should you this slept... What are they, a third grader. It is obvious this guy can't even the one person they right.<br /><br />Then again, I am on a Kindle and it is giving me fits... Autocorrect.<br /><br /><br /><br /> See, the machince corrected SLEP to the word: slept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <br /><br /><br No, I am not a great speller. For the same reason you shouldn't take me seriously... Either should you this slept... What are they, a third grader. It is obvious this guy can't even the one person they right. Then again, I am on a Kindle and it is giving me fits... Autocorrect. <br /><br /><br /> See, the machince corrected SLEP to the word: slept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <br /><br /><br /> I agree. But MarKS... Come on! Look how Latin evolved. Same way our society is going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I give up on this Kindle. You guys are lucky, I am just gonna lurk when I am on it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Financial institutions made loans and bets of their free choice and got a bailout when the consequence came down... So Banks, Brokerage Houses and Insurance compaines are held harmless, but we look down on people exercising their protected right to protest crony capitalism? Try to understand...it was a bailout of the MARKETS, not the individual companies. If it were pandering to individual companies, then Lehman and Bear-Stearns wouldn't have blown up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <br /> <img src='http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/public/style_emoticons/default/oops.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br /><br /><br /> I am giving you my excuse for being sloppy... What is that person's excuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <br /><br /><br /> I am giving you my excuse for being sloppy... What is that person's excuse? He has no excuse whatsover. Now that is settled. What do you think of his message? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <br />He has no excuse whatsover. Now that is settled. What do you think of his message?<br /><br /><br /><br /> Honestly, it fits a lot of conservatives too... That just do not want to accept change. Change is not bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Try to understand...it was a bailout of the MARKETS, not the individual companies. If it were pandering to individual companies, then Lehman and Bear-Stearns wouldn't have blown up. Does it matter? Since when, in Capitalism, did bailots become part of risk/reward/consequence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Does it matter? Since when, in Capitalism, did bailots become part of risk/reward/consequence? Yeah, it matters...if companies fail, it has little direct impact on the majority of people. If entire markets fail...that's a much, much bigger and qualitatively different problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 (edited) Yeah, it matters...if companies fail, it has little direct impact on the majority of people. If entire markets fail...that's a much, much bigger and qualitatively different problem. So? Its happened many times whether is be banks, car compaines, etc... we are capitlists, that does not mean "we made a bunch of bads bets with outlandish leverage, come help us" What self-respecting Free Enterpriser thinks like that? Ones that has the Government and Taxpayor in a State of Fear and Panic, I say..... Its no different that people who bought houses that were too expensive and got loans they did not understand because they lost sight of "risk and consequence".... and now they want refinancing and pricipal reduction? Its called bankruptcy, get a lawyer, start over.... that is a Privilage in and of itself.... Edited March 12, 2012 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 So? Its happened many times whether is be banks, car compaines, etc... we are capitlists, that does not mean "we made a bunch of bads bets with outlandish leverage, come help us" What self-respecting Free Enterpriser thinks like that? Ones that has the Government and Taxpayor in a State of Fear and Panic, I say..... Its no different that people who bought houses that were too expensive and got loans they did not understand because they lost sight of "risk and consequence".... and now they want refinancing and pricipal reduction? Its called bankruptcy, get a lawyer, start over.... that is a Privilage in and of itself.... Actually, it's extremely different. Do some research and get back to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Actually, it's extremely different. Do some research and get back to us. that's what the lobbyists, bank executives, Obama, Summers, Bush, Greenspan, Paulson, Gheitner, Benanke and the rest of the crew keep telling us.... I think they believe if they say it enough, that Americans will accept that Too Big To Fail has a place in a free enterprise system, and we (taxpayers) should back the liabilities and losses should the economy take a turn for the worse.... I will, as always, politly disgree... I think we have been duped into this underlying assumption that of we let the gamblers face the music, it would all go down the tubes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 that's what the lobbyists, bank executives, Obama, Summers, Bush, Greenspan, Paulson, Gheitner, Benanke and the rest of the crew keep telling us.... I think they believe if they say it enough, that Americans will accept that Too Big To Fail has a place in a free enterprise system, and we (taxpayers) should back the liabilities and losses should the economy take a turn for the worse.... I will, as always, politly disgree... I think we have been duped into this underlying assumption that of we let the gamblers face the music, it would all go down the tubes.... Politely and ignorantly. I had a front-row seat for the mortgage market meltdown, which put me in the 200-level for the market crisis. There is a world of difference between companies like WaMu, Countrywide, Bear, Lehman, and such going bankrupt, and the entire market seizing up for lack of capital, which is what TARP was meant to prevent. The problem wasn't bad decisions, it was that the capital markets were so !@#$ed up that companies (FAR more than just financials) were losing the ability to move money around. When you're looking at a possibility of Fortune 500 companies missing payroll because they can't float corporate notes, the problem is much bigger than "bad trades". And who the hell made up this story of "trading mistakes" anyway? Every bank on the planet went stupid at the same time? No...every bank in the country was holding reserve assets that had to be valued a specific way according to government regulations (thanks, Enron!) that, because of the market and the inflexible regulations, devalued all at the same time in the same way. That's not bad trading decisions as much as it is a perfect storm of stupidity (bad regulations, bad risk management, a complete lack of breadth in industry practices). But then, what do I know? I only worked in the field. Like many others here. We're all shills for The Man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Politely and ignorantly. I had a front-row seat for the mortgage market meltdown, which put me in the 200-level for the market crisis. There is a world of difference between companies like WaMu, Countrywide, Bear, Lehman, and such going bankrupt, and the entire market seizing up for lack of capital, which is what TARP was meant to prevent. The problem wasn't bad decisions, it was that the capital markets were so !@#$ed up that companies (FAR more than just financials) were losing the ability to move money around. When you're looking at a possibility of Fortune 500 companies missing payroll because they can't float corporate notes, the problem is much bigger than "bad trades". And who the hell made up this story of "trading mistakes" anyway? Every bank on the planet went stupid at the same time? No...every bank in the country was holding reserve assets that had to be valued a specific way according to government regulations (thanks, Enron!) that, because of the market and the inflexible regulations, devalued all at the same time in the same way. That's not bad trading decisions as much as it is a perfect storm of stupidity (bad regulations, bad risk management, a complete lack of breadth in industry practices). But then, what do I know? I only worked in the field. Like many others here. We're all shills for The Man. Outside of Regulations, why is the Public repsonsible for those items? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Outside of Regulations, why is the Public repsonsible for those items? You're an idiot. TRY to comprehend the difference between the acts of individual corporations, and a systemic failure of capital markets. Just try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 (edited) You're an idiot. TRY to comprehend the difference between the acts of individual corporations, and a systemic failure of capital markets. Just try. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't individual companies components of the "Market?" Is the Finance Sector not full of banks, brokerage houses, insurance compaines, hedge funds, etc.... were some of those compaines not given money because they were on the brink of collapse, therefore a threat to the overall marketplace we call "Financial Services?" When their assets went bad, they need capital to over their reserves, creditors or loans? Aren't some of those "Individuals Coporations" deemed to big to fail, with the logic being they bring down the market with them? Have some of them, like car companies, been bailed out before, and will again in the future? am I wrong on this one? and again, why is the Public Reponsible for private company activities when they go bad? Edited March 12, 2012 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Outside of Regulations, why is the Public repsonsible for those items? The trite answer is that the public benefited for two decades from the financial party, and TARP was a temporary loan to prevent a panic. The real answer is that without a global "TARP" you would have been screwed far worse. How many people can live without their next paycheck for two weeks and what would happen during those two weeks when there was no money to be had? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 and again, why is the Public Reponsible for private company activities when they go bad? Until you understand the difference between "companies" and "markets", you can't even discuss it intelligently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts