Thread: Does this make anyone else mad?

I can understand where the frustration comes from in situations like this. But ultimately if she were to be cut off support (and I'm first to admit that I'm 100% clueless with Unitedstatesian forms of welfare, etc., so I don't know how one qualifies, how much one gets, etc) who would suffer? Is it worth harming the children in order to make a point to the parent?

Originally Posted by OCDshaver

People like myself would argue that they don’t and that bailing them out of their mess set a precedent just as lousy as welfare. However, at least the loans to the banks under TARP were mostly repaid with interest. And, to be fair, a lot of what happened in that mess could have been directly attributed to government policies that helped create the inevitable crash – cheap money, artificially low interest rates, gov’t meddling in the housing and lending markets, and the government institutions of Fannie and Freddie. But no, the government should stay out of that area as well. Then the next time a bank fails, they can wash their hands of it knowing that it wasn’t gov’t meddling that was responsible for it in the first place.

As with everything... that's not the whole story. The government may get some moneys back from the bailouts but all the homes they insured, well, they got penny's on the dollar so yeah, your tax dollars were "given" away. To name but one example.

With respect to the housing bubble though - remember too that the government is you! It was the Johnnie Q public that demanded "little pink houses for you and me." They responded and made it possible. In order to do that, people had to get creative - creativity needs to be monitored but no!! We don't want regulation or bigger government!!

We want it all, but don't want what comes with it - and then we blame those people who we asked to give us what we wanted LOL!! It's too funny really!! I love it when people state knowingly or not, that they still want America to be a superpower but are mortified at the spending that takes - or the giving of moneys to states like say... Israel. Or even developing nations... lol.

Not once have I ever thought that the American government went out of its way to create an environment that nearly saw capitalism as we know it fail with respect to the housing bubble. But blaming the government is a full time sport it seems.

Which brings us back to this notion of entitlement we are discussing... We want this woman to do right by her family, and do it on her own. If that's the case, and we don't help out those in need, then be thankful you have cops and the rule of law - or those people would be at your door... or should we do away with cops and the courts too! You pay for that too!

I bet feeding her is cheaper than policing her !!

Originally Posted by earcutter

As with everything... that's not the whole story. The government may get some moneys back from the bailouts but all the homes they insured, well, they got penny's on the dollar so yeah, your tax dollars were "given" away. To name but one example.

With respect to the housing bubble though - remember too that the government is you! It was the Johnnie Q public that demanded "little pink houses for you and me." They responded and made it possible. In order to do that, people had to get creative - creativity needs to be monitored but no!! We don't want regulation or bigger government!!

We want it all, but don't want what comes with it - and then we blame those people who we asked to give us what we wanted LOL!! It's too funny really!! I love it when people state knowingly or not, that they still want America to be a superpower but are mortified at the spending that takes - or the giving of moneys to states like say... Israel. Or even developing nations... lol.

Not once have I ever thought that the American government went out of its way to create an environment that nearly saw capitalism as we know it fail with respect to the housing bubble. But blaming the government is a full time sport it seems.

Which brings us back to this notion of entitlement we are discussing... We want this woman to do right by her family, and do it on her own. If that's the case, and we don't help out those in need, then be thankful you have cops and the rule of law - or those people would be at your door... or should we do away with cops and the courts too! You pay for that too!

I bet feeding her is cheaper than policing her !!

Clever, but you don’t get to get away with that one. The government is NOT me. Most of the time it doesn’t even represent me. Maybe in years past you could generalize like that but I find that one a little difficult get down. As our government continues to get bigger and more self serving, both sides of the aisle are becoming increasingly disenfranchised. The years of George Bush helped a lot of people on the right let go of their republican loyalties. But that did not make them loyal to the democrats. No, they realized that the gov’t was not representing them. After 8 years of Obama, perhaps some of the left will feel the same….or not. I never made any demand for a little pink house. Nor did anyone I know. But your community organizer president did. He helped the radicals right here in Chicago organize against banks such as Bell Financial as they demanded loans to low income families. I watched on the news when it happened. The only thing was, at the time I was too naïve to understand where the outrage was coming from. It wasn’t coming from individuals. It was coming from the organizers. Washington continued to pressure banks over the years to loosen up those lending standards (a march led by Barney Frank). Was that regulation or the elimination of it? In the wake of this there were many people who took advantage of the landscape in order to buy what they should have never bought. But the demand for it was made possible by gov’t NOT ME. The banks finally said, sure we’ll make the loans (and a lot of money) provided your stooge Fannie or Freddie buys this crap from us…..and they did. Gov’t was supposed to be you and me but did you really have a say in any of that? If any of us actually could have known what we SHOULD know now it wouldn’t have happened that way. And looking at the whole mess of artificially low interest rates via the FED, Fannie and Freddie, Congress and all of its influence, none of it the product of the free market or capitalism. Yet when this bubble burst, people like yourself tell us that capitalism failed us. What a laugh. What part of that was capitalism or the free market? What part of giving people what they wanted without being able to pay for it represents capitalism?

Originally Posted by OCDshaver

Clever, but you don’t get to get away with that one. The government is NOT me. Most of the time it doesn’t even represent me. Maybe in years past you could generalize like that but I find that one a little difficult get down. As our government continues to get bigger and more self serving, both sides of the aisle are becoming increasingly disenfranchised. The years of George Bush helped a lot of people on the right let go of their republican loyalties. But that did not make them loyal to the democrats. No, they realized that the gov’t was not representing them. After 8 years of Obama, perhaps some of the left will feel the same….or not. I never made any demand for a little pink house. Nor did anyone I know. But your community organizer president did. He helped the radicals right here in Chicago organize against banks such as Bell Financial as they demanded loans to low income families. I watched on the news when it happened. The only thing was, at the time I was too naïve to understand where the outrage was coming from. It wasn’t coming from individuals. It was coming from the organizers. Washington continued to pressure banks over the years to loosen up those lending standards (a march led by Barney Frank). Was that regulation or the elimination of it? In the wake of this there were many people who took advantage of the landscape in order to buy what they should have never bought. But the demand for it was made possible by gov’t NOT ME. The banks finally said, sure we’ll make the loans (and a lot of money) provided your stooge Fannie or Freddie buys this crap from us…..and they did. Gov’t was supposed to be you and me but did you really have a say in any of that? If any of us actually could have known what we SHOULD know now it wouldn’t have happened that way. And looking at the whole mess of artificially low interest rates via the FED, Fannie and Freddie, Congress and all of its influence, none of it the product of the free market or capitalism. Yet when this bubble burst, people like yourself tell us that capitalism failed us. What a laugh. What part of that was capitalism or the free market? What part of giving people what they wanted without being able to pay for it represents capitalism?

Hey hold on here!! You are making all kinds of claims and attributing things to what I said that aren't true!

NOTE:

I never said capitalism failed us! Never - I don't know how to say that! I think it's impossible really. What went on during the housing bubble is pure capitalism - it didn't fail us. Capitalism is rife with bubbles going back as far as the markets origins. Google the South Sea company. This is nothing new - it's just that this one was so big and encompassing...

Moreover, this (for me) is not about who was in power at the time. I couldn't care less if it was a Democrat or a Republican... nor will history.

Ok that said - here is a great quote, "Remember, the purpose of economics is to make simple things complicated so as to exclude most of the public from debates on the most important policy issues that affect their lives."

Hence, I don't know how to address your feeling of alienation with respect to your government - sorry. But I will say it is your job to educate yourself as well, and saying it's not individuals faults but rather organizers faults is a cop-out. You empower the organizer. That's what democracy is all about...

Remember too that a free market is exactly what causes bubbles!! And nobody was "giving" anybody anything!! Sure you can look back now and say that was the case with 20/20 vision, but to think that people thought they weren't going to gain is silly!! Not this soon after the tech-bubble! Seriously man!


As for regulation - the government can push for all it wants! The Fed effed up sure - but they aren't beholden to the government. They should have caught this one. But that's the thing about bubbles... greed seeps in everywhere. The SEC should have caught it too! Most importantly, government auditors should have caught it.

Capitalism definitely did not fail us. It is just the nature of capitalism. When it is good it is good. When it is bad people get screwed. The government steps in to help when it gets bad. At least that is the philosophy of Keynesian economics. Sort of like an individual with bipolar disorder taking mood stabilizers. However, you have to find the right meds at the right dose which can be vexing. I think it is called a bull or a bear economy for a reason.

Originally Posted by earcutter

Hey hold on here!! You are making all kinds of claims and attributing things to what I said that aren't true!

NOTE:

I never said capitalism failed us! Never - I don't know how to say that! I think it's impossible really. What went on during the housing bubble is pure capitalism - it didn't fail us. Capitalism is rife with bubbles going back as far as the markets origins. Google the South Sea company. This is nothing new - it's just that this one was so big and encompassing...

Moreover, this (for me) is not about who was in power at the time. I couldn't care less if it was a Democrat or a Republican... nor will history.

Ok that said - here is a great quote, "Remember, the purpose of economics is to make simple things complicated so as to exclude most of the public from debates on the most important policy issues that affect their lives."

Hence, I don't know how to address your feeling of alienation with respect to your government - sorry. But I will say it is your job to educate yourself as well, and saying it's not individuals faults but rather organizers faults is a cop-out. You empower the organizer. That's what democracy is all about...

Remember too that a free market is exactly what causes bubbles!! And nobody was "giving" anybody anything!! Sure you can look back now and say that was the case with 20/20 vision, but to think that people thought they weren't going to gain is silly!! Not this soon after the tech-bubble! Seriously man!


As for regulation - the government can push for all it wants! The Fed effed up sure - but they aren't beholden to the government. They should have caught this one. But that's the thing about bubbles... greed seeps in everywhere. The SEC should have caught it too! Most importantly, government auditors should have caught it.

Thanks for the clarification. I took your statement "that nearly saw capitalism as we know it fail with respect to the housing bubble" to mean that you felt that capitalism had failed. However, I disagree with your idea that the free market causes bubbles. I attribute these bubbles to cheap money (ie the Fed). Keeping interest rates lower than they should be sends signals to the economy that there are resources (money) available for long term investments. Later people find that there are less resources available than they anticipated and we find that we're over invested in one thing or another. But if the Fed were not involved with this and interest rates were allowed to adjust according to what the market would decide, this cheap money would dry up and long term investment would slow until such time that they adjust again. This is unpopular because we are always trying to tinker with the economy to force it to do what we want. When it backfires, as in the housing bubble, then it becomes justification for more tinkering. Now we use the financial crisis to justify more tinkering by the Fed. Remember that it was the Fed's charter to eliminate this fluctuation and stabilize the economy. What a great job its doing. The fact that you're telling me that the Fed, SEC, and gov't auditors should have caught all of this makes my case that gov't failed us and continues to fail us. But when the circle of people involved are working for big banks one day and the gov't the next day, its all semantics. The way I see it, the best thing you can do is get gov't out of it as much as possible.

And no, I don't view it as cop-out to feel this way. The last budget debate that took place? The bill that went into law was signed 30 minutes after it was actually published for review. Obamacare? We needed to sign it into law so we could see what was in it. Our gov't has gotten out of control and only a few of us even bother to be outraged by it. The fact is, most of the damage that gets done is done behind our sleeping backs. The people who are involved in this as a full time job don't even have the time or resources to know fully what is going on. There is no way we can either. Knowing that, do we want more or less government?

Originally Posted by OCDshaver

Thanks for the clarification. I took your statement "that nearly saw capitalism as we know it fail with respect to the housing bubble" to mean that you felt that capitalism had failed. However, I disagree with your idea that the free market causes bubbles. I attribute these bubbles to cheap money (ie the Fed). Keeping interest rates lower than they should be sends signals to the economy that there are resources (money) available for long term investments. Later people find that there are less resources available than they anticipated and we find that we're over invested in one thing or another. But if the Fed were not involved with this and interest rates were allowed to adjust according to what the market would decide, this cheap money would dry up and long term investment would slow until such time that they adjust again. This is unpopular because we are always trying to tinker with the economy to force it to do what we want. When it backfires, as in the housing bubble, then it becomes justification for more tinkering. Now we use the financial crisis to justify more tinkering by the Fed. Remember that it was the Fed's charter to eliminate this fluctuation and stabilize the economy. What a great job its doing. The fact that you're telling me that the Fed, SEC, and gov't auditors should have caught all of this makes my case that gov't failed us and continues to fail us. But when the circle of people involved are working for big banks one day and the gov't the next day, its all semantics. The way I see it, the best thing you can do is get gov't out of it as much as possible.

And no, I don't view it as cop-out to feel this way. The last budget debate that took place? The bill that went into law was signed 30 minutes after it was actually published for review. Obamacare? We needed to sign it into law so we could see what was in it. Our gov't has gotten out of control and only a few of us even bother to be outraged by it. The fact is, most of the damage that gets done is done behind our sleeping backs. The people who are involved in this as a full time job don't even have the time or resources to know fully what is going on. There is no way we can either. Knowing that, do we want more or less government?

You make a strong argument - that is for sure! .

I'll just say this - recall that Wall Street is where the real power is - and they have army's of smart people looking out for their interests. I only know of a few who made huge profits off the back of this bubble! It was coined as "betting against America" at the time - sad!

It really is sad when someone calls out and is called a traitor - I guess it's the old emperor cloths story. Anyway, my point is, the last person I want looking out for me is people on Wall Street lol!! The absolute last .

As for a "free market" - we might be talking semantics. I personally think the market was free do as it pleased. Outside "noise" clearly wasn't listened to correctly. What the government does - what the fed does - what the public does - does not mean to me, that a market isn't free. Actually - I might argue the market was too free in it's creating derivatives of derivatives lol!!

I am not sure I am advocating for more or less government - I guess less in the long-run I am advocating for smaller because I really feel the government is extremely inefficient... of course the ability for a bill to be pushed into law in 30 minutes would refute that lol.

Who knows... I still "believe" in welfare though.

All of this is interesting discussion, but the real point of the matter is the fact that greed is present in the world. You cannot regulate that out through a free market or the government. It will exist. Greed causes bubbles... Not all in the government or all in the banking industry are greedy. Bad apples seem to define what-ever area they exist in though. All we can do is try and avoid the bad apples as much as we can do on our own!

Originally Posted by carpedm

All of this is interesting discussion, but the real point of the matter is the fact that greed is present in the world. You cannot regulate that out through a free market or the government. It will exist. Greed causes bubbles... Not all in the government or all in the banking industry are greedy. Bad apples seem to define what-ever area they exist in though. All we can do is try and avoid the bad apples as much as we can do on our own!

lol - and that's why capitalism works !!

Hey, we are helping the economy by purchasing our expensive soaps, oils and razors. I mean when you buy a Wade and Butcher for 200 + you can throw the "I will save money in the long run" argument out the window. Do we really need to do all this? No. But I would not go back to my three dollar can of goo.