Random Political Thoughts

[136 or 142]

No, not pensioners' or depositors' or stockholders' or inherited money - his wealth came from the destruction of the purchasing power of people holding the currencies he attacked - mostly regular working people who had managed to save something from their paychecks.

As I said above this was entirely due to the fault of the bad economic policies in those countries.  Soros merely perfectly legally correctly bet against the currencies of those countries believing that their bad economic policies would cause them to fall. In so doing, Soros actually played a vital roll by punishing bad policies.

That their was a 'contagion' that also hit a number of other Asian countries with sound economic policies was unfortunate, but those countries quickly saw their currencies rebound.

[136 or 142]

Careful...you're sounding very socialist wit such softy sympathy for "regular working people".

Of course, you don't expect Man-Boy to be consistent and I'm sure you, like me, don't believe for a second that Man-Boy actually gives a rat's ass about the regular working people of those countries.  He's crying crocodile tears and lying because he gets to bash a liberal in the process.

If Man-Boy really did care, he would similarly go after Paul Singer.  However Paul Singer is a major Republican Party donor and, no doubt, Man-Boy has never even heard of Paul Singer from the lying Republican Party propaganda websites he gets his 'news' from.

[136 or 142]

I should also point out that the effects of a decline in a nation's currency is actually mixed.  While it does negatively impact their citizen's standard of living, it is also positive for exporters and for domestic companies that compete with foreign imports.  So, the effects on job creation of a currency decline are, in the short term anyway, usually positive.

This is the reason China does not allow their yuan to trade freely, but they rather peg its value to the American Dollar.  They know that if the yuan did trade freely its value would increase significantly.

That said, there is no doubt that the effects of a sharp decline in a currency are likely nearly all negative for the country that experiences it.

[PB the Deplorable]

As I said above this was entirely due to the fault of the bad economic policies in those countries.  Soros merely perfectly legally correctly bet against the currencies of those countries believing that their bad economic policies would cause them to fall. In so doing, Soros actually played a vital roll by punishing bad policies.

That their was a 'contagion' that also hit a number of other Asian countries with sound economic policies was unfortunate, but those countries quickly saw their currencies rebound.

I'll give you a holler next time some Wall St scumbag is out ripping people off, so you can orchestrate the defense

[AZ/CO]

Actually, you will find quotes from me and many others stating of the need to pass TARP before it was voted on by Congress.  The process of 'money destruction' is well known as is its potentially devastating effects on an economy.  The the Federal Reserve shrunk the money supply during the Great Depression is likely the main reason it was as severe as it was and lasted as long as it did.

It is true that the banks were slow to loan out the money they received which is why the economy took so long to begin recovering.

Comparing the bank meltdown of 2008 to the Dot.com bust of 2000 is pretty lame, to put it bluntly.  First, the Dot.com bust was far milder than the bank meltdown, and given the central role banks play in an economy the potential for contagion had it not been stopped would have almost certainly resulted in the greatest depression in at least the last 100 years.

I don't believe there is a single mainsteam economist that opposed the TARP program.  Only a handful of gold bugs and Austrian Von Mises type loons.

Not being an economist either, I was simply comparing bubbles - internet vs. housing.  I did not mean to imply those two crisis' were of the same magnitude.  How about the S&L crisis?  That only cost us 125 Billion in rescue money

Since the Fed has reduced short-term interest rates to near zero since '08, banks have been able to borrow at the lowest costs in history.  And the banks are raking in the  interest on the masses of money they are sitting on.  How nice that this practice has been going on for 6 years!

With very few regulations and collateral required, TARP was enacted and, sorry, it hasn't been good for anyone but Wall Street.  The banks' executives didn't miss any bonuses.  Frankly, I'm not complaining.  I'm retired and my income goes up with the market.  I just don't care for the way some folks extoll the virtues of the bailout. 

[PB the Deplorable]

... You condemn Soros for doing what your moral idols do, only he did it risking his own money, NOT pensioners' or depositors' or stockholders' or inherited money.  This, while you still cheer on people who enabled the Wall St looters who ruined the lives of millions. WTF kind of blind hatefulness has taken over your soul?

When have I ever 'cheered on' Wall St greed and criminal behavior?  Or even unethical behavior?  Answer:  never.

The Democrats and the Left like to insist 'Wall St' is nearly exclusively made up of Conservative Republicans.  While at the same time trading money for favors - in the form of campaign contributions, jobs after leaving office, gifts and payola from lobbyists.  And of course the funding of the worst people among us by George Soros.

The fact is most of the higher up decision makers don't give a hoot about party politics - they spend their time running their companies.  They give cash to both sides, so they have access and influence no matter who is currently in office.  For some reason the fair and balanced media mostly report on this only when the R's are the recipients.

In fact it seems like every time some corporate big shot speaks, or writes a NY Times op-ed, it's on behalf of higher taxes, more gun control, etc.  Names like Gates, Jobs, Buffett.  Big Media rails against companies like GE, who pay no taxes, yet forget to mention their CEO Jeff Immelt is one of Obama's unofficial chief economic advisors. 

The worst actor on Wall St is Goldman Sachs.  They've sent people to every administration (Treasury and Fed) since I can remember - they don't care if it's Republican or Democrat.  They are the ones that kicked off the 2008 collapse by slicing up sub-prime mortgages an repackaging them as AAA rated securities.  Eric Holder announced no one at Goldman, nor Goldman itself,  would be prosecuted. 

Not really sounding like it's 'the Conservatives', is it?

Careful...you're sounding very socialist wit such softy sympathy for "regular working people".

Here's the 2008 Presidential election results by county

[attachimg=1]

Here's the 2012 Presidential election results by county

[attachimg=2]

I would suggest those voting Dem are basically 3 groups - a) those who have become dependent on handouts, b) the 'elite' snobby Libs who think they know better how to run everyone's life, and want Big Government to do so, and c) the miscreants and misfits who hate this country and are thrilled to go march, chant, and make nuisances of themselves whenever they are told to.

The Red sections on those maps - regular working Americans, the Conservatives.

[VtaGeezer]

How about the S&L crisis?  That only cost us 125 Billion in rescue money

Something like 1,800 financial types from S&L's were convicted, many sent to prison, and more were fined heavily. Not one of the principals or their lieutenants from the instigators of the '08 near-collapse were prosecuted from the '08 catastrophe, and the banksters kept every penny of the billions they transferred to their own wealth through massively inflated bonuses and salaries even as they knowingly drove their own long respected banking firms into the ground by loading them with bad paper of their creation.  And they didn't take swap contracts or CDOs as payment... they took it in hard cash.  Hundreds of millions each. Hundreds of crooks in $2000 suits.  And today they're still at it.

[PB the Deplorable]

Actually, you will find quotes from me and many others stating of the need to pass TARP before it was voted on by Congress.  The process of 'money destruction' is well known as is its potentially devastating effects on an economy.  The the Federal Reserve shrunk the money supply during the Great Depression is likely the main reason it was as severe as it was and lasted as long as it did.

It is true that the banks were slow to loan out the money they received which is why the economy took so long to begin recovering...

You bring up an interesting topic - the money supply.

Most people don't know how money is created.  It's generally not just 'printed up' by the Fed (if it were, we wouldn't have deficits), although they have been doing some of that with their Qualitative Easing the past several years.


Money is created by the banks when they make loans.  Say someone deposits $100 in their account.  The bank must keep a few percent of deposits on hand, but lend out, say, $95 of that $100.  The depositor still has his money on deposit, and the new borrower has the newly created $95.  That $95 ultimately ends up in someone's bank account, and another $90 is created and lent out to someone else, and so on.

Most money is held electronically - there isn't a specific physical dollar bill in the vault tied to every dollar on deposit.  When more bills are needed (withdrawals go up), that's when the Fed prints more physical bills.

So when the economy is robust, there is plenty of money floating around and the money supply increases as loans are made.  When the economy contracts, while outstanding loans continue to be paid down, new loans aren't as easy to get, less loans are made, and the money supply contracts - 'money destruction'.  There are repercussions when there is too much or too little 'money' in the system, sometimes severe.

I think the reason so many Goldman Sachs people rotate into the various administrations is because they are the ones who understand the real life effects of economic policy better than anyone else.  That, along with large campaign contributions.  Problem is, they appear to be crooks.

[VtaGeezer]

The Red sections on those maps - regular working Americans, the Conservatives.

I'm thinking your capitalization of "Red" is a Freudian slip; few working conservatives meet your level of required purity.

[136 or 142]

Man-Boy wrote:
"I would suggest those voting Dem are basically 3 groups - a) those who have become dependent on handouts, b) the 'elite' snobby Libs who think they know better how to run everyone's life, and want Big Government to do so, and c) the miscreants and misfits who hate this country and are thrilled to go march, chant, and make nuisances of themselves whenever they are told to.

The Red sections on those maps - regular working Americans, the Conservatives"

Wow, this has to be our village idiot's stupidest post yet.

A.The southern red states are the biggest 'takers' while the wealthy liberal states of California and Massachusetts are the biggest 'givers'.

B.You mean like the people who go around telling other people who they can and can't marry?

C.Liberal haters like Cliven Bundy.

Also, if you check the 2012 presidential exit polls you'll see that people earning between $30,000-100,000 a year (i.e the middle class) split roughly 50-50.  Obama won them narrowly in 2008.

But hey if it makes you feel superior, like an 'elite', to consider yourself a 'regular hard working American' then you, our village idiot, can go right ahead.

[136 or 142]

Wow, man-boy you actually got the 'money creation' process dead on.

Makes me wonder all the more how you were so misinformed on how the unemployment rate is calculated.

[PB the Deplorable]

Man-Boy wrote:
"I would suggest those voting Dem are basically 3 groups - a) those who have become dependent on handouts, b) the 'elite' snobby Libs who think they know better how to run everyone's life, and want Big Government to do so, and c) the miscreants and misfits who hate this country and are thrilled to go march, chant, and make nuisances of themselves whenever they are told to...

Wow, this has to be our village idiot's stupidest post yet...

What, that's not correct?

Who exactly is it that you think votes Democrat?

[136 or 142]

What, that's not correct?

Who exactly is it that you think votes Democrat?

Decent hard working Americans vote both Democratic and Republican, as my post on the middle class voters shows.  The vast majority of those on 'hand outs' don't vote, except, presumably for corporate farmers.

[136 or 142]

Something like 1,800 financial types from S&L's were convicted, many sent to prison, and more were fined heavily. Not one of the principals or their lieutenants from the instigators of the '08 near-collapse were prosecuted from the '08 catastrophe, and the banksters kept every penny of the billions they transferred to their own wealth through massively inflated bonuses and salaries even as they knowingly drove their own long respected banking firms into the ground by loading them with bad paper of their creation.  And they didn't take swap contracts or CDOs as payment... they took it in hard cash.  Hundreds of millions each. Hundreds of crooks in $2000 suits.  And today they're still at it.

There actually was at least one banker who went to prison at the start of the financial meltdown. The founder and,  I believe, chair of Country Wide Financial did go to jail.

[VtaGeezer]

There actually was at least one banker who went to prison at the start of the financial meltdown. The founder and,  I believe, chair of Country Wide Financial did go to jail.

That would be Hank Mozilo.  Not a Wall Streeter.  He didn't go to jail but he was fined about $65M by the SEC but BofA paid much of fine and legal fees as part of their purchase deal for Countrywide.  He made about $500M in the subprime fraud.  He still has a great tan.

[Gd5150]

Who exactly is it that you think votes Democrat?

The ignorant.

[NowhereInTime]

The ignorant.

Better "ignorant" than maleficent like conservatives. 

[VtaGeezer]

The ignorant.

No, just not seething with the latent resentment that talk radio has made acceptable.  Ignorance is watching the GOP set the nation up for a grand looting by their patrons, and a phony war that will have our grandkids fighting Islamists, then voting for them again.

[136 or 142]

The ignorant.

There have been polls taken that show that Faux News watchers (I.e Republicans) know less about current events than people who don't follow the news.

[136 or 142]

That would be Hank Mozilo.  Not a Wall Streeter.  He didn't go to jail but he was fined about $65M by the SEC but BofA paid much of fine and legal fees as part of their purchase deal for Countrywide.  He made about $500M in the subprime fraud.  He still has a great tan.

Actually I was thinking of Angelo Mozillo, but, it seems your broader point is accurate.  He paid a 'big' fine but never went to jail.  It seems the justice department lawyers protected him because he was the inventer of Mozillo Firefox.


Edited: oh I see you did say 'Mozillo' I guess you got the 'Hank' because you were thinking of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson.

[Marc.Knight]

Here's a perfect example of the current idiots running our country:


http://youtu.be/WnkB7OgxNh8


http://youtu.be/1ikPG0zvR8w


U.S. Department of State Spokesperson Jen Psaki

[Kelt]

I just watched the first video, and she immediately corrected herself.


So, given the fact that the first video is in fact a clear case of partisan lying... didn't bother watching the other, longer vid.


Speaking from a non-partisan viewpoint, I'd ask if you think lying helps or hinders any point you were trying to make?

[Catsmile]

I just watched the first video, and she immediately corrected herself.

So, given the fact that the first video is in fact a clear case of partisan lying... didn't bother watching the other, longer vid.

Speaking from a non-partisan viewpoint, I'd ask if you think lying helps or hinders any point you were trying to make?

It's called spin now, not lying.
And if you are talking to a conservative it's called facts.

[PB the Deplorable]

Man-Boy wrote:
"I would suggest those voting Dem are basically 3 groups - a) those who have become dependent on handouts, b) the 'elite' snobby Libs who think they know better how to run everyone's life, and want Big Government to do so, and c) the miscreants and misfits who hate this country and are thrilled to go march, chant, and make nuisances of themselves whenever they are told to.

The Red sections on those maps - regular working Americans, the Conservatives"

Wow, this has to be our village idiot's stupidest post yet.

A.The southern red states are the biggest 'takers' while the wealthy liberal states of California and Massachusetts are the biggest 'givers'.

B.You mean like the people who go around telling other people who they can and can't marry?

C.Liberal haters like Cliven Bundy.

Also, if you check the 2012 presidential exit polls you'll see that people earning between $30,000-100,000 a year (i.e the middle class) split roughly 50-50.  Obama won them narrowly in 2008.

But hey if it makes you feel superior, like an 'elite', to consider yourself a 'regular hard working American' then you, our village idiot, can go right ahead.

A.  I didn't say those getting handouts all vote Democrat, just that the ones who do are a major constituency

B.  This is the United States.  Supposedly a Representative Republic.  Since when does the majority not get to determine something as personal and important as the definition of marriage?  Since when do a handful of Liberal activist judges get to make these decisions?  Why are we allowing the Supreme Court to butt in?  This is not a Constitutional issue, no matter what the sophists say

I care more about process than the end being justified by the means.  The 9th and 10th Amendments cover these social issues - rights retained by the states and by we the people.  They were never meant to be decided by advocates who go 'judge shopping' in order to get the results they want.  Issues that arise, like gay marriage, abortion, and the like, were meant to be decided by each state for it's own citizens

To put it another way, the D's are the party of big government.  They've built the size of government up to be powerful enough to force it's (their) will on us - gay marriage and abortion as I mentioned, but also confiscatory tax policy, meddling with our ability to own and carry weapons, national pot laws, other federal laws that supersede state laws and rights, outrageous legislation such as 'ObamaCare' interfering with our health care insurance, on and on, right down to telling us what light bulbs we can have and what bags to use to carry our groceries home in.  It never ends with these people

C.  I think you know who I mean by the people who hate the this country.  The people who are always attacking it, smearing it, always bringing up only the worst aspects of our history and culture and never anything positive.  Let me know if you need details - they include s bombers like Obama's BFF, tree spiking to maim or kill loggers, advocating the killing of police, burning and fouling our downtowns in the name of 'protest', those  in academia and the media who encourage this stuff...  I can go on if you like.

[Gd5150]

To put it another way, the D's are the party of big government.

That really is the simplest way to explain the difference between the modern left and right. The left has faith that the people of government will be less corrupt, less greedy, and do what they tell us they will do. The right has more faith in the private sector running things and being less corrupt and less greedy. The MAIN difference is when the private sector does something the public doesn't like, the public has the ability to go elsewhere. Shop elsewhere. Buy someone else's product. Freedom of choice. Which forces the private sector to comply with the public's wishes, or be dissolved.


The government is the ultimate monopoly. That's why it can run deficits and build up debt that would put anyone out of business. It answers to no one. It ignores it's own laws. It doesn't have a budget and hasn't for 6 years despite it being a federal law. It's employees can and do enrich themselves and pass laws for the good of themselves without a care of who is harmed. Thats why you have corrupt politicians that remain in power for decades. Ultimately, the government has absolute power, and as we all know, "absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Riker.

[136 or 142]

A.  I didn't say those getting handouts all vote Democrat, just that the ones who do are a major constituency
As I've already  told you the vast majority of those receiving 'handouts' don't vote.  the only significant percentage of the '47% of takers' that do vote are senior citizens on social security, and they vote in greater numbers that the population as a whole.  For what it's worth I also don't believe that seniors on social security are either 'takers' or receiving 'handouts'.


B.  This is the United States.  Supposedly a Representative Republic.  Since when does the majority not get to determine something as personal and important as the definition of marriage?  Since when do a handful of Liberal activist judges get to make these decisions?  Why are we allowing the Supreme Court to butt in?  This is not a Constitutional issue, no matter what the sophists say

Oh, I see,so you have no problem with 'big government' imposing its will when its imposing its will on people you don't like.  Can you at least pretend to show some consistency when you mindlessly parrot your dimwitted talking points you picked up from Rush Dimbaugh?

C... advocating the killing of police

So, you mean in addition to supporters of Cliven Bundy, G. Gordon Liddy?

[Kelt]

It's called spin now, not lying.
And if you are talking to a conservative it's called facts.

Joking aside,  it's disheartening that obvious lies are cheerfully used as a political cosh. At least in the past there used to be some kind of an effort  made to conceal the lie.

I guess Dumbing Down means people can often get away
with a plain lie and the viewer /listener/reader doesn'r even bother to fact check.

[NowhereInTime]

That really is the simplest way to explain the difference between the modern left and right. The left has faith that the people of government will be less corrupt, less greedy, and do what they tell us they will do.

Almost, but not quite; we on the left also want to believe that the government does what we the people tell it to do.  Unfortunately, there is a thick, now nearly impenetrable wall of "self-interested" parties which skew that message.

The right has more faith in the private sector running things and being less corrupt and less greedy.

This is what mystifies me about the Right; they themselves have admitted that their primary motivation is to act in their own "self-interest"; Hell their theory of government is based on one big happy market where "self-interest" is the rule of law.


How can self-interest ever be anything but greedy and corrupt (maybe not the self-interested party, but to everyone else)?

The MAIN difference is when the private sector does something the public doesn't like, the public has the ability to go elsewhere. Shop elsewhere. Buy someone else's product. Freedom of choice. Which forces the private sector to comply with the public's wishes, or be dissolved.

This is the other fallacy of conservatism.  This idea of the "invisible-hand" guided by the flow of consumers voting via capital. 


When the private sector does something the public doesn't like they lie about it, hire batteries of attorneys, fire and discredit whistleblowers, bribe and/or coerce public officials into protecting it, and other malevolent acts, all done without scrutiny because the media (lame ass and lazy as it is) doesn't bother investigating private malfeasance as it does government incompetence.

The government is the ultimate monopoly.

This is any government, anywhere.  This difference, here, (at least supposed to be) is that involvement by the people should negate harmful consolidations of power.

That's why it can run deficits and build up debt that would put anyone out of business.

Except, of course, a government, which can borrow money at far lower rates than any business or private citizen could, and can pay off on its own terms.

It answers to no one. It ignores it's own laws. It doesn't have a budget and hasn't for 6 years despite it being a federal law.

Due to political malfeasance.  It's a function of obstructionism in the House that nothing is done. No negotiation, no compromise, nothing but intractability.  How is this the will of the people?

It's employees can and do enrich themselves and pass laws for the good of themselves without a care of who is harmed.

Like Dennis Hastert's land deal?  Like Whitewater?

Thats why you have corrupt politicians that remain in power for decades.

That and utter apathy by the electorate.  This is because conservatives fight mandatory civics classes at a district by district level. People never bother to fight for their rights because they don't know the process.

Ultimately, the government has absolute power, and as we all know, "absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Riker.

Government doesn't have absolute power except for the power we give it.  This is the failure of a lazy, fearful, cynical, uninformed electorate.

[136 or 142]

1.How can self-interest ever be anything but greedy and corrupt (maybe not the self-interested party, but to everyone else)?



This is the other fallacy of conservatism.  This idea of the "invisible-hand" guided by the flow of consumers voting via capital. 

Adam Smith's theory was the people would act in 'Enlightened self interest'.  While there is no question that this has failed many times, recent examples such as Uber and other things in the 'sharing economy' as well as many previous examples in history show that Smith was on to something. To paraphrase Churchill, capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others.





2.Except, of course, a government, which can borrow money at far lower rates than any business or private citizen could, and can pay off on its own terms.

The government borrows by selling bonds on the open market, and though the rates they get are the lowest available, I believe it's only by either 25 or 50 basis points and they have to pay them off on the basis of the terms. I believe the government generally sells either 10 or 25 year bonds.  I don't believe there is a single government in the world that has a credible economy that finances its debt by printing money.

[PB the Deplorable]

And just so you know:  I'm not 'anti-gay'. 

I am however anti Gay Mafia.  The 'Activists' who turn everything into a 'gay' issue - the same way the Racialists try to make everything about race.  I've watched for years as they've interfered with everyone else's rights - blowing whistles and blocking doors and sidewalks so people they don't like can't speak or be heard.  Blocking common sense aids policies.  Interfering with other people's activities and mocking them (think Catholic Church, or any religious group they don't like).  On and on.

Name calling, smearing, lying - you know, the usual tactics employed by the Left.  So no, I don't stand up for bullies, or give in to them.  The Gay Mafia doesn't give a hoot about anyone else, and to encourage them and their tactics is a mistake.

Look at the way they've gone after a few bakers here and there, or places that hold parties and weddings.  Look at the way they went after the Boy Scouts.  They run to the courts insisting everyone else has to cater to them.  Other people have rights too, but no matter. 

The courts - again operating on their whims and agendas - have come out in favor of forcing a few bakers here and there to knuckle under and provide the gay mafia what they want.  Somehow I'm guessing that if a printer refused to print KKK flyers, the court would not order them to do so.  If some anti-Muslim group wanted to have a conference at some hotel, somehow I doubt a court would force the hotel to cater to them either.  But that's different, you see 


Want gay 'marriage'?  Go through the process - passage by the state legislatures.  Convince the majority - use logic, rationality, appealing to people's sense of fairness.  Using the courts to cram it down our throats, and the Gay Mafia to bully us?  Hell no.  And the same goes for the rest of the Left's - or anyone's - agenda that the majority doesn't want currently.