Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 59
  1. #26
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    There was a lot of hoarding of money in those days and private loans were though to get without collateral, which no one had...money needed to circulate in the economy, but private business alone failed America then as it's failing us today..
    ROFL. The crash itself was a product of the government created credit bubble (sound familiar?) and then the Depression itself was extended by further meddling (and in spite of the stimulus presided over by the wise in DC) instead of letting the economy correct itself.

  2. #27
    Rising above the Fray spursncowboys's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    7,669
    There was a lot of hoarding of money in those days and private loans were though to get without collateral, which no one had...money needed to circulate in the economy, but private business alone failed America then as it's failing us today..
    op article
    Critics' Objection No. 1: People Are Saving Instead of Spending, and Banks Are Not Lending.By Borrowing and Spending these "Idle Savings," Government Can Circulate More Money Through the Economy. This is the most common defense of government stimulus cited by policymakers. Indeed, among proponents of government spending there is a strong focus on whether people are spending or saving, with the implication that spending circulates through the economy while savings effectively drop out.

    But savings do not drop out of the economy. Nearly all people put their savings in: (1) banks, which quickly lend the money to others to spend; (2) investments in stocks and bonds; or (3) personal debt reduction. In each of these situations, the financial system transfers one person's savings to someone else who can spend it. So all money is quickly spent regardless of whether it was initially consumed or saved. The only savings that drop out of the economy are those hoarded in mattresses and safes.

    Some contend that recession-weary banks are hoarding savings well beyond the legal minimum reserves. Yet even when banks hesitate to lend their deposits, they invest them in Treasury bills to keep them circulating through the economy and earning interest.[14] In fact, the federal funds market--where banks lend each other any excess cash at the end of the day--exists because banks refuse to sit on unused cash even overnight. Thus, even in recessions, one person's savings quickly finances another person's spending.[15]

    Advocates of the "idle savings" theory fail to specify the location of all these newly hoarded piles of dollar bills they believe have been shielded from spending in the financial system. Even more telling, they also fail to explain--even if there were massive amounts of idle savings--how the federal government is supposed to acquire them for injection as new spending. After all, even if individuals, businesses, and banks were hoarding dollar bills in mattresses and safes, why would they suddenly lend them to the government to finance a stimulus bill? The very idea of hoarding dollars suggests these people and businesses would not trust the financial system, and would be quite unlikely to attend the next Treasury bill auction.[16]

  3. #28
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    They chose to put it in T-bills.....without a U.S., there money was worthless..
    Lame and weak rationale to justify government spending. Based on that logic we should have no individual liberty. Individuals can't accomplish that which will best glorify the state! They just get in the way. Maybe you and Yonivore should get a room.

  4. #29
    Rising above the Fray spursncowboys's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    7,669
    MB: Were you ok with the Federal govt. trying to stop bank runs?

  5. #30
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    But savings do not drop out of the economy. Nearly all people put their savings in: (1) banks, which quickly lend the money to others to spend; (2) investments in stocks and bonds; or (3) personal debt reduction. In each of these situations, the financial system transfers one person's savings to someone else who can spend it. So all money is quickly spent regardless of whether it was initially consumed or saved.
    Speculation is not spending....you might as well burn the money because it can disappear...

  6. #31
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Some contend that recession-weary banks are hoarding savings well beyond the legal minimum reserves. Yet even when banks hesitate to lend their deposits, they invest them in Treasury bills to keep them circulating through the economy and earning interest.[14]
    ...and it all becomes a big circular cluster- .....the govt prints money, spends some of it and lends some out, the part that's spent helps to drive the economy, while the part that lent is speculated, hoarded, or relent back to the govt for a interest rate that matches inflation...a few pennies per dollar are actually lent to consumers and some goes to private business..

  7. #32
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Yes, government spending can put under-utilized factories and individuals to work--but only by idling other resources in whatever part of the economy supplied the funds. If adding $1 billion would create 40,000 jobs in one depressed part of the economy, then losing $1 billion will cost roughly the same number of jobs in whatever part of the economy supplied Washington with the funds. It is a zero-sum transfer regardless of whether the unemployment rate is 5 percent or 50 percent.
    The writer is under the impression that business taxes pay completely for stimulus funds....in fact, deficit spending pays for most of the stimulus...one could argue that this leads to higher borrowing rates for private business, which is does, but those are marginal costs for most businesses when compared to employment costs..

  8. #33
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    even if there were massive amounts of idle savings--how the federal government is supposed to acquire them for injection as new spending
    Taxing the rich - duh!

  9. #34
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Lame and weak rationale to justify government spending. Based on that logic we should have no individual liberty. Individuals can't accomplish that which will best glorify the state! They just get in the way. Maybe you and Yonivore should get a room.
    There you go again carrying things to extremes...nobody is against the free-market, at least not one that is properly regulated...but lobbyists have cir vented the free-will of the people, there are a group of people who would love to regulate the money in Washington, repeal all the bush (and Obama) infringements on our Cons utional rights, end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and reduce the national debt by reducing govt. expenditures during periods on economic growth, the way it should be - those aren't tea baggers either...that is the progressive agenda...

  10. #35
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    There you go again carrying things to extremes...nobody is against the free-market, at least not one that is properly regulated...but lobbyists have cir vented the free-will of the people, there are a group of people who would love to regulate the money in Washington, repeal all the bush (and Obama) infringements on our Cons utional rights, end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and reduce the national debt by reducing govt. expenditures during periods on economic growth, the way it should be - those aren't tea baggers either...that is the progressive agenda...

    Yeah, the Dems LOOOVE regulators.



  11. #36
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    :yawn


    ...the real problems weren't freddie Mac, those losses could have been absorbed, the real problem was private lending and that was all PHil Graham (R) TX..

    The Glass-Steagall Act provided the proper oversight and en y separation that would prohibit banks and other financial companies from merging into giant trusts (conflict of interests) -- giant trusts or corporations being more powerful, naturally, and having the seemingly limitless capital to lobby their corporate interests, however, with a very myopic scope (particularly when it comes to factoring in potential losses -- most banks, as seen in contemporary times, chose not to anticipate losses in the mortgage market; they presumed home prices would continue to appreciate).

    In 1999, former Senator Phil Gramm (who is, incidentally, Senator John McCain's economic adviser and cochairs his presidential campaign) set out to completely gut the Glass-Steagall Act, and did so successfully, replacing most of its components with the new Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: allowing commercial banks, investment banks, and insurers to merge (which would have violated an rust laws under Glass-Steagall). Sen. Gramm was the driving force behind the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as he had received over $4.6 million from the FIRE sector (Finance, Insurance and Real Estate donations) over the previous decade, and once the Act passed, an influx of "megamergers" took place among banks and insurance and securities companies, as if they had been eagerly awaiting the passage of Gramm's Act. Everything in between Glass-Steagall and Gramm-Leach-Bliley (i.e. Savings and Loan crisis/bust) was, in large part, the incubation period for what would take place over the nine years that would follow the passage of Gramm's Act: an experiment in deregulation.

    Shortly after George W. Bush was elected president, Congress and President Clinton were trying to pass a $384 billion omnibus spending bill, and while the debates swirled around the passage of this bill, Senator Phil Gramm clandestinely slipped a 262-page amendment into the omnibus appropriations bill led: Commodity Futures Modernization Act. It is likely that few senators read this bill, if any. The essence of the act was the deregulation of derivatives trading (financial instruments whose value changes in response to the changes in underlying variables; the main use of derivatives is to reduce risk for one party). The legislation contained a provision -- lobbied for by Enron, a major campaign contributor to Gramm -- that exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight. Basically, it gave way to the Enron debacle and ushered in the new era of unregulated securities. Interestingly enough, Gramm's wife, Wendy, had been part of the Enron board, and her salary and stock income brought in between $900,000 and $1.8 million to the Gramm household, prior to the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

    In 2003, Gramm left the Senate to join UBS, which had acquired investment house PaineWebber due to his deregulation bill. At UBS, Gramm lobbied Congress, the Fed and the Treasury Department. During Gramm's tenor at UBS and as a lobbyist, Congress passed the Responsible Lending Act, billed as an anti-predatory-lending measure, but was called the "Loan Shark Protection Act" by consumer advocates, as it was designed to preempt stronger state laws against anti-predatory lending. The Fed largely ignored the underlying and growing problems within the subprime mortgage/housing markets, as Bernanke famously acknowledged the housing market in April, 2007 as, "[showing] signs of softening," but said that a "sharp slowdown," is unlikely. Then, according to Mother Jones magazine, Henry Paulson became the Treasury Secretary in July, 2007, when, "In 2005, [at] Goldman [he] securitized $68 billion in residential mortgages and $23 billion in 'other assets' primarily related to CDOs," (Mother Jones, August, 2008). With such self-interest, and a lack of the nation's interest, we can see how this subprime mess was allowed to escalate to such great proportions.
    Link

  12. #37
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    There you go again carrying things to extremes...nobody is against the free-market, at least not one that is properly regulated...
    but lobbyists
    Who else do you believe wants the market "properly regulated"? Further, the federal government regulates, nay, owns the creation of money and credit in this nation and we've seen the result.


    have cir vented the free-will of the people, there are a group of people who would love to regulate the money in Washington, repeal all the bush (and Obama) infringements on our Cons utional rights, end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and reduce the national debt by reducing govt. expenditures during periods on economic growth, the way it should be - those aren't tea baggers either...that is the progressive agenda...
    ROFL. And they want milk and cookies for all the children too.

    Thanks to "progressives" the feds continue to inch into every nook and cranny of our lives, and the lobbyists have free reign to shape that as they see fit. your agenda.

  13. #38
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    ...the real problems weren't freddie Mac
    LOL. Oh, really? If this didn't start with the Fed and the GSEs, it must come from "injuryboard.com".

  14. #39
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,407
    So did all of Bush's deficit spending shrink the economy during his term?
    Pfff..govt spending is only good when Republicans do it....and when govt spends, the money just disappears into thin air...whereas private money magically gets distributed by the rich to the poor...
    chump and nbdan. had you read the op, you probably wouldn't look as stupid.
    I did a search for "Bush" and it said nothing about his deficit spending.

    Tell us what it says about Bush's spending.

  15. #40
    Rising above the Fray spursncowboys's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    7,669
    I did a search for "Bush" and it said nothing about his deficit spending.

    Tell us what it says about Bush's spending.
    Maybe if you read it, you wouldn't be asking me.

  16. #41
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,407
    Maybe if you read it, you wouldn't be asking me.
    Maybe if you could answer me, you would answer me.

    So you can't. No big deal. It's expected.

  17. #42
    Rising above the Fray spursncowboys's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    7,669
    Anyone who read the op knows your a moron. I tried to help you.

  18. #43
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,407
    Anyone who read the op knows your a moron. I tried to help you.
    No, you didn't. Feel free to answer if you can.

  19. #44
    Rising above the Fray spursncowboys's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    7,669
    No, you didn't. Feel free to answer if you can.
    I did. The answer is in the OP.

  20. #45
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,407
    I did. The answer is in the OP.
    You didn't.

    It's ok. No one expects anything from you by now.

    "Post without comment." That's you all over.

  21. #46
    Believe. admiralsnackbar's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    4,010
    When people reflexively state Keynesian economics don't work, why do they talk about Japan but leave out Brazil (which was massively bailed out in the mid-late 90's and is now doing quite well)?

    Given the US has much more in common with Brazil than Japan, this seems a dodgy omission.

  22. #47
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    LOL @ the market will adjust itself...

    Please stop with the utopic world and come down to the real world of speculators, patent trollls and lobbyists...

  23. #48
    Displaced 101A's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    7,711
    The writer is under the impression that business taxes pay completely for stimulus funds....in fact, deficit spending pays for most of the stimulus...one could argue that this leads to higher borrowing rates for private business, which is does, but those are marginal costs for most businesses when compared to employment costs..

    OK class, and where do the deficit funds come from?

    (hint: it's in the OP - and the net result is exactly the same as a business tax)

  24. #49
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    OK class, and where do the deficit funds come from?

    (hint: it's in the OP - and the net result is exactly the same as a business tax)
    HInt: no it's not...deficit funds come from a lot of places, not just business..

  25. #50
    Displaced 101A's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    7,711
    HInt: no it's not...deficit funds come from a lot of places, not just business..
    So, you're NEVER going to read the OP?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •