Why bankers rule the world

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

dok likes to abide by these strict liberal talking points like "smaller govt = no regulation!" and go off on tangents from there like "see! we tried that before and it lead to this and this! therefore we must need big government!"

It's not a tangent at all. You advocate for a type of government and economic policy (laissez-faire, free market, low taxes) that has historically failed time and time again.

lol nobody is talking about deregulation. shrinking government control and influence over every little facet of our lives doesn't necessarily mean any deregulation at all.

laissez-faire economics means no regulations and letting the market control itself.

what good would come out of putting government in charge of the financial sector?

The government being in control of the financial sector =/= the government regulating the financial sector

you expect them to regulate themselves?

According to laissez-faire philosophy, everyone regulates themselves!

they're the ones who turned a blind eye to the whole subprime thing that started this mess and arrested NO ONE

They turned a blind eye and did nothing. Sounds like what small government would do

because it was all more CRONY capitalism like i've been speaking of. certain people and companies are allowed to get away with murder while the compe ion isn't, it isn't free market at all.

Large companies being able to chew the rest of the country up and spit it out is what the result of a free market economy has always been. History has countless examples of this.

deregulation and smaller government are not synonymous terms at all.

whenever i talk about shrinking government im talking about getting rid of the TSA and bogus surveillance and erosion of civil liberties, get rid of these 15 or so agencies dedicated to just spying and interfering in other countries foreign affairs.

Now you're going off on a tangent. My original point had nothing to do with the TSA/NDAA/etc. and you know where I stand on those issues. You know when I say we need big government its addressing the economy/taxes/etc.

the government needs less influence in our lives, not more, and putting them in charge of banking fixes nothing. if by "deregulation" you mean less regulating of my underpants and what is contained therein at the airport then yeah, i'm for ing deregulation.

Where did I say we should put them in charge of the banks? I think we should regulate the banks, not nationalize them.

What do you suggest we do to the banks? Let them run free like Reagan said we should.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

there aren't the insane amounts of wealth in those countries as there are here, that's why. the more wealth and greed there is, the more opportunity for corruption. and you're insane if you think those countries live in some awesome utopia where everyone lives like kings and there's freedom and liberty for all. for instance, canadians who have money come here for treatment because their own ty socialistic medicine that all you liberals ooh and ahhh over ing sucks. the average canadian earns slightly less on average as well.

There's A LOT more freedom and liberty in those countries than there is here. There is no War on Drugs or rampant military spending in Canada like there is here.

O, and the median Canadian income is higher than the median American income. I'm not sure what the average income is but average/mean income is a meaningless statistic. It doesn't account for how much wealth is concentrated at the top. If you put Bill Gates and 50,000 homeless people in a ballpark, the average person in that ball park is a millionaire.

[mavs>spurs]

There's A LOT more freedom and liberty in those countries than there is here. There is no War on Drugs or rampant military spending in Canada like there is here.

O, and the median Canadian income is higher than the median American income. I'm not sure what the average income is but average/mean income is a meaningless statistic. It doesn't account for how much wealth is concentrated at the top. If you put Bill Gates and 50,000 homeless people in a ballpark, the average person in that ball park is a millionaire.

I won't even bother responding to the totally frivolous and FALSE post above this one because of the annoying chumpdumper tactic you used, but I'll tackle this one because I can make you look dumb in about 2 seconds. Per wiki, US is ahead of canada on median household income. you talk out of your ass too much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income

canada sucks bro, you love it so much why don't you move there? just don't get sick or your ass will be right back tbh.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I won't even bother responded to the totally frivolous and FALSE post above this one because of the annoying chumpdumper tactic you used, but I'll tackle this one because I can make you look dumb in about 2 seconds. Per wiki, US is ahead of canada on median household income. you talk out of your ass too much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income

canada sucks bro, you love it so much why don't you move there? just don't get sick or your ass will be right back tbh.

stats from 2007
numbers from before the recession
you thinking that makes me look dumb while not responding to my other post because you can't

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

http://middleclasspoliticaleconomist...ntries-in.html

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I won't even bother responding to the totally frivolous and FALSE post above this one because of the annoying chumpdumper tactic you used, but I'll tackle this one because I can make you look dumb in about 2 seconds. Per wiki, US is ahead of canada on median household income. you talk out of your ass too much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income

canada sucks bro, you love it so much why don't you move there? just don't get sick or your ass will be right back tbh.

this is almost right up there with the tax brackets post. I wasn't talking out of my ass at all. Canada surpassed the US in median income some time in the last year. Anyone who reads the news knows this.

[Borat Sagyidev]

this is almost right up there with the tax brackets post. I wasn't talking out of my ass at all. Canada surpassed the US in median income some time in the last year. Anyone who reads the news knows this.

As a new Canadian resident (temp for now) I can confirm this is true, not only from a quan ative sense but from a qualitative sense. The population over here (Ottawa) tends to be much more affluent and content than in TX. Minnesota and Maine are the closest US states with similarities in my experience. Cost of living is higher in the populated areas, but just about everyone gets paid more and if you wish you can move far out from the city for cheap living.

As far as medicine and wait times, the longest I have waited so far in a brief sample of 3 months is half of an hour. The 2 doctors I have seen here were pretty attentive and knowledgable as well. Whereas in TX, it was more hit or miss, especially since many are going their to avoid litigation and medical board restrictions.

However, the U.S. does top Canada in murders, numbers of wars currently engaged in and personal bankruptcies due to health care costs.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

As a new Canadian resident (temp for now) I can confirm this is true, not only from a quan ative sense but from a qualitative sense. The population over here (Ottawa) tends to be much more affluent and content than in TX. Minnesota and Maine are the closest US states with similarities in my experience. Cost of living is higher in the populated areas, but just about everyone gets paid more and if you wish you can move far out from the city for cheap living.

As far as medicine and wait times, the longest I have waited so far in a brief sample of 3 months is half of an hour. The 2 doctors I have seen here were pretty attentive and knowledgable as well. Whereas in TX, it was more hit or miss, especially since many are going their to avoid litigation and medical board restrictions.

However, the U.S. does top Canada in murders, numbers of wars currently engaged in and personal bankruptcies due to health care costs.

Canada's health care system being so bad and having horrid wait times is for the most part anecdotal bull . The two people I know from Canada who go to school here say they get better healthcare in Canada and the whole idea that you have to wait months on end in Canada because of socialist medicare is a crock of .

Canada as it stands is a more prosperous country than America, but the "small government!" people will drum up whatever bull they can to deny this (like use income figures from 2007 ).

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Tbh, regulate through the justice system and send the crooks to jail...

You can call them crooks but nothing they did was illegal so idk how you plan on throwing them in jail. After Reagan completely deregulate the finance industry during the 80s it was perfectly legal to do everything they did. If you don't like credit default swaps on subprime mortgages, then make them illegal.

and stop encouraging malinvestments, risky behavior from the financial industry

The finance industry didn't need encouragement to make risky investments, once Reagan deregulated them they engaged in risky behavior on their own. What specifically was encouraged? Be specific.


I'll ask again (even though you didn't answer and won't), how did Ronald Reagan's small government, laissez-faire decisions like the complete deregulation of the finance industry work out?

[boutons_deux]

St Ronnie the Diseased deregulated financial sector, and few years later, taxpayers lost $400B+ (in 2011 $) on the S&L scandal. Anybody remember any Repugs ing about the S&L bailout and the Repug dereg that enabled it?

[Clipper Nation]

The finance industry didn't need encouragement to make risky investments, once Reagan deregulated them they engaged in risky behavior on their own. What specifically was encouraged? Be specific.

When the Fed artificially keeps interest rates low, it triggers a false boom period, in which people think there's enough savings and capital to allow for riskier, poorly-conceived projects to be successful when there really isn't....

At first, because it's cheap to borrow money, these risky projects look profitable on paper (when they wouldn't turn a profit with a natural interest rate)... money starts flowing into these "bubble" markets not because of consumer demand, but because the money supply is increasing, creating malinvestments...

Eventually, the market inevitably corrects itself, malinvestments are exposed, and people lose a lot of money... instead of letting the free market dictate the interest rates, the Federal Reserve's manipulation sends the wrong message to investors and creates an unstable boom-and-bust economy... this is the root cause of both the real estate bubble and its collapse, for example...

I'll ask again (even though you didn't answer and won't), how did Ronald Reagan's small government, laissez-faire decisions like the complete deregulation of the finance industry work out?

And yet, your question is flawed, because Reagan absolutely wasn't a small-government, laissez-faire president at all.... he tripled our national debt, and in his second term, the value of the dollar went through one of its worst declines in recent memory.... he slurped the GOP defense cronies with his expensive "Star Wars" project, and embarrassed himself with the Iran Contra scandal.... these aren't the actions of a small government....

As for the deregulation, you miss the point that large corporations, banksters, and crooks actually like regulation in practice, as it allows them to regulate away the compe ion through lobbying and crony capitalism...

[boutons_deux]

"because it's cheap to borrow money"

... many lenders don't want to lend because their interest returns are equally low. And when the lenders qualify the riskiness of the project, they see the risk/reward isn't worth it.

With higher interest rates, the risk/reward for lenders is more attractive.

The real scandal is when (mortgage) lenders make risky, poorly qualified loans, pocket the fee (higher the loan, higher the fee), then dump the mortgage on Wall St or on F&F. Solution (like in DK), lenders own/service the loan to maturity.

[Clipper Nation]

"because it's cheap to borrow money"

... many lenders don't want to lend because their interest returns are equally low.

Your beloved Fed seems to think that they're encouraging lending when they keep the interest rates low and make it cheap to borrow....

[boutons_deux]

Your beloved Fed seems to think that they're encouraging lending when they keep the interest rates low and make it cheap to borrow....

The Fed can go itself.

It doesn't have a lot of tools and traction when it has lowered its rate effectively to zero and sometimes negative percent. Big corps are sitting on $Ts of cash to go along with their profits and extremely low income tax payments, so cash is not what they are starved for.

If the Fed and Treasury could deliver several $T into the (true) small businesses and consumers, then we'd make some PROGRESS.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

And yet, your question is flawed, because Reagan absolutely wasn't a small-government, laissez-faire president at all.... he tripled our national debt, and in his second term, the value of the dollar went through one of its worst declines in recent memory....

"Well, small government is perfect and always leads to a lower deficit because I said so even though history completely contradicts that, therefore, anyone who tripled the national deficit automatically can't be considered a small government president regardless of his small government policies!"

What country/civilization/whatever has had whatever you consider a small-government, laissez-faire system and from what timer period did they have it? Be specific.

he slurped the GOP defense cronies with his expensive "Star Wars" project, and embarrassed himself with the Iran Contra scandal.... these aren't the actions of a small government....

I'll give you this part, but his economic policies were totally small government laissez-faire policies.

As for the deregulation, you miss the point that large corporations, banksters, and crooks actually like regulation in practice, as it allows them to regulate away the compe ion through lobbying and crony capitalism...

So then Reagan's deregulations worked amirite? Why is it corporations lobby for deregulations and government agency shutdowns if all of this was true? Why do all the politicians who get money from the Koch Brothers want the EPA shut down? Why did Willard promise his cronies that he'd repeal Dodd-Frank and SOX?

lol your argument being based on the premise that government is always controlled by special interests and lobbyists

[Clipper Nation]

lol your argument being based on the premise that government is always controlled by special interests and lobbyists

The proof is in the pudding.... we have corporate shill lobbyists pushing corporate shill agendas and corporate shill regulatory laws on corporate shill politicians, while small businesses and average Americans get screwed over....

You keep asking about how laissez-faire economics have worked in the past, but you fail to acknowledge that we've hardly tried it in recent memory.... even our attempts at deregulation have never come with a serious attempt to end the debasement of our currency and the boom-and-bust price-fixing of the Fed, rendering it completely useless.... you can't tell the free market to operate freely when you're simultaneously handicapping it with phony interest rates and worthless fiat money...

Meanwhile, the Keynesian economics of the left and neocon right have done nothing but lead us into false bubbles, harsh market corrections, and screwjobs for the 99%...

[boutons_deux]

"government is always controlled by special interests and lobbyists"

which is true. Nothing happens in govt unless somebody is making or saving money.

Saw "Lincoln" last night.

While I read that Lincoln was lawyering for the railroads as they railroaded the people before he got into politics, it's really hard to imagine a Lincoln making an Emancipation Proclamation-type speech today, or fighting for a 13th-amendment type of law.

Even the progressive stuff For The People of the 1960s, ERA, affirmative action, Medicare/Medicaid is targeted by Repugs/VWRC for destruction, and they also want to destroy the hated FDR's PROGRESS of the 1930s, and they are well on their way to destroying those targets.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

The proof is in the pudding.... we have corporate shill lobbyists pushing corporate shill agendas and corporate shill regulatory laws on corporate shill politicians, while small businesses and average Americans get screwed over....

Why are big, evil socialist governments like Canada and Germany not controlled by corporations like America's government is when America's government is smaller? There is no proof that big government leads to corrupt government nor are the two remotely the same.

You keep asking about how laissez-faire economics have worked in the past, but you fail to acknowledge that we've hardly tried it in recent memory....

That probably has to do with the fact it led to the great depression the last time we did.

even our attempts at deregulation have never come with a serious attempt to end the debasement of our currency and the boom-and-bust price-fixing of the Fed, rendering it completely useless.... you can't tell the free market to operate freely when you're simultaneously handicapping it with phony interest rates and worthless fiat money...

So you're admitting the economy operated better before Reagan's deregulations? Glad we cleared that up.

Meanwhile, the Keynesian economics of the left and neocon right have done nothing but lead us into false bubbles, harsh market corrections, and screwjobs for the 99%...

Yeah, cutting taxes and deregulating the finance industry like Reagan did is totally Keynesian.

[Clipper Nation]

Why are big, evil socialist governments like Canada and Germany not controlled by corporations like America's government is when America's government is smaller? There is no proof that big government leads to corrupt government nor are the two remotely the same.

Actually, there's a fair amount of crony capitalism in the Canadian oil industry, as well as government-backed monopolies such as Bell Canada....

That probably has to do with the fact it led to the great depression the last time we did.

You mean the same depression that was truly ended by World War II? The New Deal actually prolonged it....

So you're admitting the economy operated better before Reagan's deregulations? Glad we cleared that up.

Because Reagan's deregulation was halfassed....

Yeah, cutting taxes and deregulating the finance industry like Reagan did is totally Keynesian.

Debasing our currency to chase false prosperity is extremely Keynesian....

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Actually, there's a fair amount of crony capitalism in the Canadian oil industry, as well as government-backed monopolies such as Bell Canada....

So then which country has the laissez-faire economy with no crony capitalism and limited control you desire? Just name one example of a country that had this policy and educate me on how well it worked.

You mean the same depression that was truly ended by World War II? The New Deal actually prolonged it....

1) So you don't deny laissez-faire economics led to the great depression?
2) How effective was Hoover's laissez-faire approach to the depression?

Because Reagan's deregulation was halfassed....

But they were still deregulations, they shoulda done something if small government is so good :confused:

Debasing our currency to chase false prosperity is extremely Keynesian....

So basically you label everything that negatively effected the economy as Keynesian and everything that positively effected the economy laissez-faire.

[Th'Pusher]

So then which country has the laissez-faire economy with no crony capitalism and limited control you desire? Just name one example of a country that had this policy and educate me on how well it worked.

There isn't one, which is telling in and of itself. When he brings up Hong Kong, make sure and rebut with the fact that Britain ultimately retained property rights deciding to whom land was granted.

[Agloco]

Which brings this all back to a point I made in another post ...why not just print 16 trillion dollars and pay off all our debt? There would be trillions more dollars to invest and our debt would be paid in full...

Problem is, Dan actually believes his statement. He thinks that we can continue to in anyones cornflakes and they'll keep on gobbling it up. smh.

[mavs>spurs]

Which brings this all back to a point I made in another post ...why not just print 16 trillion dollars and pay off all our debt? There would be trillions more dollars to invest and our debt would be paid in full...

The problem with that is, the financial markets have this uncanny way of adjusting to stuff like that. Pump the market full of 16 trillion dollars, and the value of the dollar will adjust. The end result being that nobody wants to touch US dollars because they can be devalued at any time, nobody wants to invest in US treasuries because you'll lose half of your investment whenever they just print the money in order to pay you, your dollar won't be good for and we're all in worse shape than had we just kept our credibility and paid off the debt we owed.

[boutons_deux]

" just print 16 trillion dollars and pay off all our debt"

not required.

Print $4 or 5T into infrastructure (not lending to the financial sector to gamble with) and gets the consumption up and tax revenues flowing in.

[Clipper Nation]

m>s' point still stands with that non-solution tbh.... debasing our currency is morally wrong and harmful to our economic futurePERIOD