When the House rejected the first Wall Street bailout bill on Monday, the markets responded by shaving 777 points off the Dow, and posting even larger percentage gains off the broader indices, prompting more than few congressmen (and from what I hear, a lot of scared constituents) to reconsider their vote out of fear of a crash of 1929 proportions.
When the wise men and women in the Senate acted on this renewed sense of urgency, passing a goody-crammed bill by a commanding 74-24 margin, the Dow responded by shedding another 350 points. And today, after dozens of representatives flipped their vote to assure passage in the House, the Dow immediately dropped another 300 points, eventually ending the day down 157 points at 10,325.
That’s some thank you.
Despite a mid-week recovery, the Dow closed down 818 points for the week, a 7.3% decline that leaves total returns during the Bush era in negative territory, the worst market performance during any administration since that of Herbert Hoover. What should be obvious by now is that a mere $700 billion of taxpayer money can do little to assuage the hunger of a market that can (and has) shed twice that from its total value in less than a day of trading.
The bailout package may indeed prevent some large financial institutions from failing, or at the very least, from failing fast and hard, and in so doing no doubt might stabilize the financial markets a bit. But the problem is that the Dow and the other indices we tend to obsess on are perhaps less connected to our real economy than at any time in their history. These are feel good numbers—or feel bad numbers, depending on the day—that have little direct impact on the majority of Americans, most of whom live paycheck to paycheck. So the implied promise that somehow this bailout would pump up the markets was not just illusory, it was mostly meaningless to the majority of taxpayers who are being asked to foot the bill.
The truth is, our economy sucks, and there are no quick fixes. This bailout may save the jobs of executives at a handful of financial giants, but it will not prevent the recession in which most economists believe we are already mired, nor end it more quickly; and by emptying our coffers of yet another $700 billion we don’t have, the bailout has left the next adminstration with fewer tools with which to address our ever worsening economic crisis. We now have $700 billion less to spend on fiscal stimulus, or to serve the ever growing social needs of our nation’s unemployed, or to address the multi-trillion dollar infrastructure deficit (roads, bridges, water, sewers, schools etc.) that threatens to undermine our future health, welfare and prosperity.
Monday’s 777 point drop in the Dow made for great headlines, and in that vice I was as guilty as anybody else, but this bailout was never about the Dow, or rather, it was always about the Dow, but never should have been. Sure, this bailout was good for Wall Street, or at least, some people on Wall Street… but if you were expecting the markets to rebound and the economy to recover with a simple wave of President Bush’s pen, well, I think you just got played.
In the stock market there are no manners, only what something is worth.
The wild swings in the DJ averages tell us one thing and one thing only: Even the “Smart Money” has no idea how to price this cluster fuck created by the philosophy of Reagan Republicans.
Here’s more cold water on your face: No one, and I mean no one, knows if $700 billion is enough, too much or “it-doesn’t-even-fucking-matter.”
Republicans fucked America BIG TIME.
Deregulation, lobbyists, and free market mentality has ruined the lessons learned from the Great Depression.
This is why voting Republican is voting for Campaign First and not Country First.
The final verdict has been rendered; Trickle Down economics is a colossal failure. It belongs in the unmarked grave with Marxism, Communism and Fascism.
Pathetic. End of argument.
What’s even worse about this problem is it only goes to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Bush Administration knew this was coming.
They were simply trying to run out the clock until either McCain won, or best case Obama won and after he took over in office the bottom fell out.
Either way, this is treason. Pure and simple.
Voting Republican is voting for a domestic terrorists party worse than al Qeada.
No really!! Trickle-down theory works.
Look at all the jobs it has created in India, Mexico, Myanmar and all those other countries that the wealthy invest their tax cuts in.
Is it just me or do we have less choices as consumers now after 28 years of Reagan Republicanism?
More banks or less?
More airlines or less?
More owners of news outlets or less?
More oil companies or less?
More electric companies or less?
More health insurance coverage or less?
More TV manufactures in the US or less?
Are you paying more or less for goods and services?
Trickle down economics, tax cuts for the wealthy and abolishing the estate tax only serves to create the breeding ground for an aristocracy. Which our founding fathers detested.
Country First or Campaign First?
The answer is obvious; The failure is conservatism.
Now for the next wave, which is expected to hit very soon:
Gov. “Terminator” has sent a letter to Tres. Secty Paulson saying that unless it gives the State of California a 7 billion dollar bailout loan, the state will default on it’s obligations within a few weeks. Such a default of state bonds would create a rolling crisis across Wall Street as the “safest” investments are considered at risk. In other words, California, also, may be “Too Big To Fail”, threatening the financial markets with a collapse which would make today’s bailout package totally irrelevant.
Or we could see each of the 50 states, and numerous municipalities, standing in line for their own bailout packages.
Republican economics suck. Now I know why Palin kept smirking when she talked about Republican plans to help Middle America through tax cuts.
The Peoples Republic of Wall Street.
Andrew Bacevich, a self-described conservative, was recently on Bill Moyers’ Journal. There’s also an interview of him on The Nation. An excerpt from the latter:
Blacevich is correct in that Obama isn’t talking about consumerism all that much, but Obama is talking about doing some of the things necessary to transform ourselves from a consumerist society back to something more industrial, which would, in turn, bring back some of the middle class wages that have eroded since the Reagan years.
The thing Blacevich doesn’t acknowledge, however, is how doing the right thing is generally not politically viable. I mentions that we made a fateful choice back in 1980, but he doesn’t talk about why we did make that choice and how we might have gone in another direction.
The full solution isn’t simple. Nevertheless, we have pretty much validated Galbraith’s assessment of the trickle-down theory–it is “the doctrine that if sufficient oats are fed to the horse, a few grains will pass through to the road for the sparrows.”
Goldie, You are a little confused. The bail out is not intended to directly affect the market. It is intended to provide liquidity to the central banks, so that banks can once again have money to loan to people to buy houses (hopefully on realistic terms) buy cars, open businesses, increase inventory, hire workers, etc. Will it solve all of our problems? I don’t think so, but it is an important element to help the situation not get too much worse.
GBS–
You are often a level-headed thinker.
But it seems like on this issue your Partisan-Gland is totally out of whack causing you blindness & bouts of severe anger.
Here is the “pill” you need to take–
Look at what opportunities these market swings open up for a smart guy like you who is a risk taker.
GBS, I made $18,000 day-trading Apple this AM and $8,000 on NOV in 2 days.
That’s all I did.
Is that sick??
Depends upon how you look at it.
I took a risk….not too huge because I have the resources to hang on to the stock or even absorb a 100% loss on my investment…a pretty unlikely circumstance with companies like Apple & NOV.
I did a series of short-term trades on JRCC at your urging. They worked our great.
Seems like you are sincerely concerned about your fellow man & woman. Good. Make money and donate some.
The system flushes out excessive risk takers eventually. It always does. This is why I only play ST Gambling moves with money I can afford to lose. I have zero debt.
Some people will re-mortgage their homes and max out credit cards to day-trade.
That is stupid…they deserve to go bankrupt.
Some of the mortgage problems are undoubtedly rooted in that.
Now–
Let’s talk about Monday.
I got lucky today & Apple and am tempted to test fate again…but I’m going to watch the opening on Monday.
I’m looking again around $95.
JRCC also had a big mid-day uptick…but closed weak. Another target perhaps??
Country First does not mean being a martyr GBS. You are waaaaaaaay to smart to do that shit.
When the fiscal conservative “adults” came in office after the 2000 elections they were handed $300 Billion dollar surplus, a “pay as you go” federal budget which stopped the national debt from growing and actually paid down the national debt that was just over $4 trillion dollars.
Now we have $11.3 TRILLION dollars in debt, another $500 billion in deficits plus another Trillion dollars or so in total expenses towards the Iraq War.
Not including any FUCKING interest on that mountain of debt that’s over $1 Trillion dollars of tax payer money per year squandered!!!
Question:
How fucking stupid and down right unpatriotic do you have to be to vote Repubican this year.
Answer:
Either a Republican or an member of al Qeada. Nothing else.
After the November elections we’ll be able to take the number of votes for McCain and determine how many American names should be on the Terrorist No Fly List.
Dept of HLS ought to be busy.
@9 You’re insane and boring as hell.
A month ago in one of his posts GBS revealed in one short paragraph more knowledge about trading and investing than you have in one hundred posts.
Mr Cynnical.
I find your day trader mentality, well, not seeming so truthful. You were the one who posted many a times on this blog that you are a LONG TERM investor so you don’t have to pay Captial Gains Tax.
Now you’re a day trader?? C’mon!! I’ve seen that lure before and I’m not taking the bait.
If what you’re saying is true make a copy of your trade confirmation slips, blackout your acct # info and your name and let Godly post it.
Let’s see the size, dates, and durations of the trades you claim to make.
I bet you cannot produce the trade confirmation slips on the trades you claim.
Dick @8,
I understand what the bailout is intended to do, but that’s not how it was sold, especially in the wake of Monday’s 777 point dump.
FYI, Treasury yields dropped after the bailout passed, though I guess it’s too early to tell whether interbank lending has loosened up; we’ll all be watching the LIBOR.
Mr. Cynical:
You miss the point entirely though,
I am not, and NO serious “investor” takes outsized risks on their capital. Period.
The stock market is not designed to be, nor has it ever been intended to be a fucking CASINO.
That is gambling, much like Sen. McCain likes to do.
Conservatives bet the farm on the “come” and put America’s financial market up as collateral.
You know it, I know it, and so, too, does the rest of the world. You lost. We pay.
Here’s the scariest part: Do you think Europe is going to stand by and hope we don’t fuck up again?
No.
What you don’t understand is the EU collectively has the population and clout of America.
OPEC likes the idea of a stable Euro as the world’s currency, which means if we start buying and selling oil in Euros, America is totally fucked financially.
America First, bub. Look at the facts. Look at the decisions and run as fast as you can from the Republican Party swearing to never make that mistake again, and maybe, just maybe, we can save America.
You fool.
Truly unbelievable how fucked we are. This is a blatant transfer of wealth! Any bailout should have started by liquidating assets (houses, yachts, cars, etc.) of the upper class, but that would have defeated the purpose of the whole thing…
Cynical talks about the “excessive risk takers” being weeded out of the market, and then trumpets the virtues of gambling based upon contrarian theories of stock purchases. “Everyone should do it!” he proclaims.
Does he even recognize how useless this is as a standard for improving the standard of living of the entire nation? Micro-economic strategies based upon contrarian investment strategies involving considerable risk-taking, while producing no goods or services in and of itself, is not a solution to macro-economic problems.
In other words, if one person stands up in a stadium so he can see better, it works out well for him. But when everyone stands up, few benefit. Only the tallest see a little better, and everybody just gets more tired from standing all the time.
GBS @12 and 14 Thank you!
Cynical, he laid it down for you. Put up or shut up.
@12 “Godly”
I admire the guy, but not quite that much!
Great posts, GBS.
GBS What you miss is this financial crisis
is the fault of the democrats and their efforts
to make everyone equal. You just simply won’t
do the homework to understand the truth so I
guess you better vote for Obama. Good luck.
Deregulation was a progressive project of Carter’s administration. Jimmy and Teddy got it going, then handed off to Reagan.
Carter’s plan for energy independence: compel us to pour food into our gas tanks.
Trickle Down: 1981 Federal receipts = $600 billion; 1989 Federal receipt = $909 billion. 1980 income-tax receipts (before Reagan tax cuts) = $122 billion. Post-tax-cut income tax receipts = $393 billion.
Too much of Reagan’s revenue trickled down (increasing the deficit of those years) because Democrats in Congress did not restrain spending. But let’s cut them some slack; after the double-digit misery of Carter’s years, the Reagan Renaissance led to irrational liberal exuberance.
These are very dark times. A lot of Dems are so completely frozen by the prospect of letting the election slip they’ll let Shrub and his band of thieves get away with anything.
The RNC had ads ready to go to assault Obama on this bailout. Even though they were exposed I’m sure they’ll go ahead and run them anyway.
I’d like to believe Obama is different but everything I’ve read about him says that he’ll deal with the world “as it is” and this is a world ruled by powerful moneyed elites.
We little people here in the middle class have done the best we could with the White House. We still can do a lot to effect change with the Congress, the State House and the localities – that should be our true power base.
20 Puddy, the only thing trickling is down your leg.
14 Now, the stock market has become very much like a casino, in one important way: The house always wins.
Let’s all try, when we see Cynical by some freeway ramp with his cardboard sign, not to snicker too loudly.
@22 Pudz really is suffering a sockpuppet identity crisis. You guys told me about that when I first showed up here. I see what you mean now.
GBS–
How should I put this??………
I really don’t care what any of you ANGRY, ENVIOUS KLOWNS think!
I have done less than a dozen short-term trades. That hardly makes me a rabid day-trader. And I do it with money I can afford to lose. And YES, I do hate ST CAPITAL GAINS…but I also see ST opportunities in a highly volitile market. My trades on JRCC were the most risky because that is far from being a topnotch company like NOV, Apple or Wells Fargo.
I have posted my trades when they happened as best I could….buys & sells. I will not send any trade confirmations or anything personal to Goldy, you or anyone.
If it makes you feel better, call me a liar.
I could really care less.
Your anger is getting the best of you GBS.
You have done some pretty short-term trades yourself…so let he who is without sin cast the first tirade!!
Your attempt to blame all the ills of the financial market on the Republicans is ludicrous. It flies in the face of the actions & inactions of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd & many other Dems. Do the R’s deserve plenty of blame? YOU BET! But to try & cast all the blame on R’s is phoney and, if you truly believe it, SICK!
GBS, you are a better person than that.
Go outside and count your blessings…which are many. Do not allow things out of your control to bind you up. Hell, as bound up as you act now, you probably haven’t taken a dump in a month.
LIGHTEN UP!
Perhaps posted angry stuff on this Blog is your relief valve. If so, keep releasing pressure.
Me, I thank God every day for what I have. I grew up with nothing and do not covet anything I own or have.
We all choose our path in life GBS.
Do not waste your energy on anger over things you do not control….and don’t be so darn self-righteous about unfair things.
PS–
The bailout passed today is BULLSHIT!
That’s why I sold those stocks so quickly today. The Market hates BULLSHIT GBS.
That’s why real day-traders who do a dozen trades in a day often end up BROKE and unhappy.
Doing a dozen trades in a couple months is NOTHING when you are only investing a tiny % of liquid assets.
Have a peaceful evening GBS.
Your a decent person.
@24 Sorry, Artfart, but I’ll be snickering as I lay tire tracks across the fool’s face. Then I’ll back up and do it again. Hell, and once more for good measure.
24. ArtFart spews:
“Let’s all try, when we see Cynical by some freeway ramp with his cardboard sign, not to snicker too loudly.”
The difference between you & me is I would never think that way about you. I would cheer your success.
Kind of a 180 degree different way of looking at life & people, isn’t it AF.
Do whatever works best for you.
@26 “call me a liar”
Liar.
27. Steve spews:
“@24 Sorry, Artfart, but I’ll be snickering as I lay tire tracks across the fool’s face. Then I’ll back up and do it again. Hell, and once more for good measure.”
Your anger is scarey Steve.
How’s your blood pressure?
Have you been released from any of those 13 restraining orders filed against you??
I’ve met plenty of Conservatives filled with anger. I avoid them like the plague. Most of them listen to Rush too much..just like the Leftists who listen to Olbermann.
I don’t listen to Rush or Olbermann…
both are consumed with self-pride, celebrity and reckless disregard for other human beings.
They love to spin things in sheer hate…boiling certain personality types to the point of exploding.
No thanks….
Steve–I’ll bet your an avid Olbermann watch.
Have your parents put the Parental Block on MSNBC and watch your outlook on life change.
Too many of you KLOWNS take things so personally you could not possibly have friends who look at life thru a different prism.
I have a lot of Liberal Friends. We argue…but we don’t obsess with things we cannot control.
Steve is an obsessive, compulsive personality.
Probably burned thru lots of relationships…especially with women.
Probably alcohol & drugs too.
I hate to see anyone waste their life consumed by anger…I really do.
Have a peaceful evening.
If Bathhouse Bwaney Fwank had a clue how to do his job, there wouldn’t have been a bailout. This is the Dems mess and they want to whine about it being Republican made. You kids are delusional as hell.
Fwank: “I see nothing wrong with this organization” back in 2004 hearings…Dumbass
GBS@1&2: Pathetic arguments my friend.
This is why you need FactCheck.org BTW look at the date. Puddy elevated this discourse way before 10-01-08.
I use it to keep the ignoramuses at bay.
http://www.factcheck.org/elect ions-2008/who_caused_the_econo mic_crisis.html
If you can remember past 24 hours I said:
The GLB bill wasn’t that much of a problem. Lefties here on this blog disagreed. So I went to FC.org – “The truth is, however, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act had little if anything to do with the current crisis. In fact, economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been.”
Puddy said Alan Greenspan (Mr Andrea Mitchell) promoted policies that laid the groundwork for the collapse. Some leftist idiots like rhp6033 disagreed, saying it was all Bush’s fault. So I went to FC.org – “Instead, he described “serial bouts of financial deregulation” going back to the 1970s. And he laid blame on policies of the Federal Reserve Board under Alan Greenspan, saying “the Fed has become the chief enabler of a dangerously speculative economy.””
Puddy gave video links where the Donkey said there was no Fannie or Freddie problem, it was all racism. Puddy then said the bill was killed cuz of racist overtones. Donkey would use this bill against Republicans all over the libtard MSM! rhp6033 and others said I was wrong. I posted the links; one was 9 minutes long with their own words. So I went to FC.org – “It’s true that key Democrats opposed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which would have established a single, independent regulatory body with jurisdiction over Fannie and Freddie – a move that the Government Accountability Office had recommended in a 2004 report. Current House Banking Committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts opposed legislation to reorganize oversight in 2000 (when Clinton was still president), 2003 and 2004, saying of the 2000 legislation that concern about Fannie and Freddie was “overblown.” Just last summer, Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd called a Bush proposal for an independent agency to regulate the two entities “ill-advised.””
I even posted Bill Clinton’s own words that it was Donkey doings.
Puddy even told rhp6033 that he was pissed the Bush Admin didn’t use the press against the Donkey and it was both sides fault. So I went to FC.org –
# The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
# Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
# Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
# Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
# The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
# Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
# Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
# Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
# The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
# An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.
# Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.
Looks like Puddy was right AGAIN! And Fact Check verifies Puddy comments.
Sucks to be you lefties. GBS, try again with real facts.
rhp6033: You have no clue about California.
I have two sisters who live in California.
1) Donkey in the legislature were/are/continue to want to pander to special interests and illegal aliens.
2) Business is leaving California left and right. I already told you last year the lost tax revenue due to California Legislature Donkey wanting to tax and spend (repeat those three words)
3) Freebies galore. Don’t worry be happy attitude.
@4 “Trickle down economics, tax cuts for the wealthy and abolishing the estate tax only serves to create the breeding ground for an aristocracy. Which our founding fathers detested.”
The issue isn’t about whether our system allows some people to get rich. It’s about artificially creating a class of privileged wealthy by taxing their sources of income much less than income people work for.
Worker’s exemption: $3,500
Heir’s exemption: $2,000,000
Worker’s FICA tax: 7.65% on all wages up to $102,000
CEO’s FICA tax: 0% on all salary and bonus over $102,000
Investor’s FICA tax: 0% on all income
Worker’s marginal tax rate: 25% on income over $32,550
Investor’s marginal tax rate: Maximum 15% on infinite amount of capital gains
See what I mean? Workers are hit with punitive and confiscatory tax rates while the rich get huge tax exemptions and pay absurdly low tax rates — so they can accumulate all of the nation’s wealth in a few hands.
All I’m asking for is that workers and the Owning Class pay the same taxes. That’s why I support abolishing the estate tax and taxing inheritances the same as earned income, although you could certainly justify a 25% surcharge on the grounds the heir didn’t work for the money or do anything to deserve it.
But given existing unfair laws that put an exorbitant tax burden on workers and give the Owner Class a free ride, the obvious solution is — don’t work! I don’t — why should I, when working is punished, and sitting on my fat ass flipping stocks for capital gains is rewarded? So, I’m not gonna do any work ever again, or produce anything, and we’re just gonna have a recession.
FartyArt@22: That wasn’t me posting #20. I was in a car in heavy traffic heading up the interstate.
You on the other hand are a Putz. Drinking Steve’s Stupid Solution again, eh?
I see the vast intelligence from this poster, proving some PuddyFacts I posted long ago about Reaganomics lost on the moronic lefties of HA. I really like the pouring food into our gas tanks. That was pushed further along with the 1994 passage of the Ethanol law which Al Gorebasm “predicted” would have no effect on food prices. Well Puddy proved that wrong too.
FartyArt, get off Steve’s Stupid Solution. Let the head clear for three days and come back and try again…
@32 Even though all of that may be true, it’s a fact that banking crises occur only under Republican presidents — Hoover, Reagan, Bush. Why is that, puddinghead? Do you see a pattern?
Pelletizer just added: “Even though all of that may be true”
Well well well Pelletizer it is true. Fact Check proved it true. Your side is still in denial…
@33 What’s a “special interest,” puddy? Public schools? Nursing home care for poor old people? Health care for poor kids? Public parks and libraries? Are those “special interests” — but crop subsidies for large corporate farmers, tax breaks for billionaires, and tax credits for oil companies are not? I’ll tell you what a “special interest” is, puddy: Anything Republicans want is a “special interest” and also is waste, fraud, and abuse — and after we win the election we’re going to put a stop to all of it!
@37 Tell ya the truth, puddy, I didn’t even read your rant so I have no idea what you said much less whether it’s true or not. All I said was, “even if it is true … ”
And you still haven’t explained why banking crises only happen on the GOP’s watch …
(crickets chirping)
Cindy McCain is a drug abuser. Why isn’t she in jail? Do only poor people go to jail for using drugs illegally? Why do we let rich people abuse drugs without going to jail for it? Why should the rich get special privileges? Aren’t our laws supposed to treat everyone the same?
@ 37
Fact Check proved it true.
No. Fact Check got a few points wrong, and missed a few others. As I said in my comment in the other thread, they should have done a better job of reading their own sources.
32 – So full of bullshit it’s hardly worth commenting.
So full of worthless right wing drivel like those phony drilling rigs off Cuba.
Such a tool to the race-baiting lie-mongers of that filthy corrupt REPUBLICAN party.
That’s okay.
Yeah truth hurts.
Was there a recent sighting of HAs clueless irrational idiot as usual writing nothing?
Yep… – #42
Don Joe you mentioned CDOs. Hmmm… CDO Hedge Funds = Enron?
I mentioned Cap & Trade = Enron = Obama Still waiting for your “answer”
I mentioned Greenlining, Barry doesn’t cover it. I asked you about it. Still MIA!
I mentioned Alan Greenspan – He agreed with me
I mentioned the Democrats of 2004 with their YouTube Comments and he doesn’t cover them
What? your great guy, on the various links of many Donkey pages all over the ‘Nets?
Huh? You want me to read this guy who’s biases are so blatant even the 10 year old mind of yelling loser boy can see them?
Don Joe: The only thing I agree with reading your hero is he said blaming this on “Republican” deregulation is missing the problem. Yet the HA monkeys here seem to disagree with your hero Don Joe…
I wonder why is that? Maybe you should be advancing Barry Ritholtz to your HA leftist brethren, eh?
Go ahead Stupes – defend those imaginary drilling rigs off Cuba.
Go ahead and try to push that racist CRA right wing line.
It should be easy for you – your mentality was forged in that bat shit insane asylum.
Greenspan? He’s a fucking Republican and Ayn Rand acolyte. You think anyone’s going to buy your bullshit about guilt by association with Andrea Mitchell?
The youtube videos? A bunch of neither here nor there right wing bullshit.
You are such a fucking idiot!
HAs clueless irrational moronic idiot@47.
Too bad you can’t run from YouTube. Proves how moronic the left was and still is as Pelosi/Reid left those geniuses in charge.
CRA is part of it. I also brought up zero percent down mortages. Went past your small head.
Did you listen to Biden last night?
“Number two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now — and Barack Obama and I support it — we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you’re paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.
That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under. But John McCain, as I understand it — I’m not sure of this, but I believe John McCain and the governor don’t support that.”
Now that’s amazing…
Somehow from Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act on WikiPedia – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy_Abuse_Prevention_and_Consumer_Protection_Act
doesn’t seem to agree with Joe.
Say it ain’t so Joe!
HAs clueless idiot, do you agree with Don Joe’s hero Barry Ritholtz and his deregulation position?
Don’t worry. You thinking about it will strain that single cell called your mind.
Just do away with income taxes and have a national sales tax instead. Everybody pays the same rate on what they buy. As fair as fair can get!
@50. I’d rather get rid of the sales tax completely and put in a progressive income, topping out at 70%
Puddy @ 45 & 46
I don’t know why you insist on being such an inveterate fool, but, oh, well…
CDO Hedge Funds = Enron?
Here’s a great article under that very title. Did you bother to read it, or did it simply float right over your head? Barry’s point in that article is that CDO hedge funds suffer from the same problem, lack of transparency, that brought down Enron. No, how does this relate to, say, FactCheck’s claim that “mark to market” accounting rules, which increase transparency, caused the present financial crisis?
I mentioned Cap & Trade = Enron = Obama
Yes, you have a penchant for bringing up irrelevancies. There are, in fact, a number of good arguments on both sides of Cap & Trade vs Carbon Tax. A reasonable summary is here. But, none of this is relevant to the present financial crisis. Why bring it up? Because you prefer diversion over an intelligent discussion of the issues.
I mentioned Greenlining, Barry doesn’t cover it.
Yes, yet another one of your irrelevant diversions. If you come up with a reasonable argument that even remotely connects greenlining to the present crisis, then I’d be more than happy to discuss it.
Note, however, that Ritholtz does, indeed, discuss the CRA canard that you’ve repeatedly raised. That’s one of the reasons you keep looking like a fool. You keep falling back on arguments that have long since been compellingly refuted.
I mentioned Alan Greenspan – He agreed with me
Both Ritholtz and I agree that Alan Greenspan has been a less than admirable Fed chairman. Where Ritholtz and I disagree with you is your claim that Greenspan’s suggestion that people take out adjustable rate mortgages had anything to do with the present crisis. On this score, both you and Fact Check.org are wrong.
In order to show a causal link, you have to show both that the ARMs of which Greenspan spoke (and they are not universally subprime mortgages) played a significant role in the crisis and that significant numbers of people acted specifically on Greenspan’s advice. You’ve made no attempt whatsoever to prove either of those points.
I mentioned the Democrats of 2004 with their YouTube Comments and he doesn’t cover them
Again, Ritholtz doesn’t discuss them, because they’re not relevant to the current crisis. You have a penchant for talking about loads of bullshit without ever coming up with a cogent argument that makes your bullshit even remotely relevant.
A prime example: your claim that Democrats controlled the NYMEX based solely on the notion that the NYMEX happens to be located in New York. When you actually do try to come up with a cogent argument, the result does nothing more than redefine the meaning of the word “stupidity”.
And lastly:
The only thing I agree with reading your hero is he said blaming this on “Republican” deregulation is missing the problem.
Then, apparently, you haven’t been reading Ritholtz all that closely. Perhaps this article might clarify things? Perhaps not. After all, you didn’t get the point of the “CDO Hedge Funds = Enron?” article.
Ritholtz’ point, and one with which I agree entirely, is that trying to apportion blame between Democrats and Republicans misses the point. The present financial crisis is an abject failure of Republican philosophy. The fact that DLC Democrats bought into that philosophy doesn’t improve the philosophy. It only shows that those Democrats were just as wrong as Republicans have been.
It is worth noting, however, that the SEC regulatory exemptions of which Ritholtz’ speaks at the link above were the actions of the present Republican administration.
Though, on one point, I think you are correct. Perhaps it’s a good idea for you to not follow Ritholtz’s writings, because, clearly, you lack even the basic knowledge required to understand what he’s talking about.
50 pi
Sorry, pal, but that’s the other side talking. Democrats will make taxation more progressive, not more regressive.
52 – Excellent takedown Don Joe of the self-appointed king of the right wing bull shithouse here at HA.org.
Stupes – your ugly corrupt party is going down the tubes and once we’re in charge we’re sending home those Vichy DLC Dems to boot.
But we know you won’t be idle – you’ll be tearing your hair out and serving up even more bat shit insane right wing bullshit hysteria because it’s all you know how to do, all you can possibly do.
You’re a total tool.
Hey, I thought Bush=Enron…
48 )Pud
Re: Bankruptcy bill
Joe’s not the boss, Barack Obama is. Barack Obama voted AGAINST the bankruptcy bill, and he will sign the legislation that the Congress passses making just the changes to bankruptcies that Biden described.
@50. I’d rather get rid of the sales tax completely and put in a progressive income, topping out at 70%
50 pi
Sorry, pal, but that’s the other side talking. Democrats will make taxation more progressive, not more regressive.
Sure, Democrats are Neo-socialists who want to re-distribute all wealth. The “progressive” agenda hasn’t changed in over 100 years: take from one group and give to another.
I want to get rid of income taxes entirely because I don’t want the government meddling around in my finances. And, yes, I opposed the bail-out because I don’t believe in private gains but socialized losses.
Show how ignorant Daddy Love is!
This will be a twofer. One swing two out of the park…
yelling loser boy calls this is a take down. He’s so funny being an idiot…
Now what did Don Joe do? Don Joe scoured the Internet so Don Joe could deliver a point of two, and everything you deliver from Ritholtz Don Joe,
D E S T R O Y S
the insipid stupid arguments placed here by yelling loser boy and HA others. So I thank Don Joe for making my arguments easier. Now Ritholtz has some very good arguments and I agree with some of his points. But Paul Krugman disagrees with Ritholtz on some points. Yet Goldy has used Krugman many times here. So is Goldy wrong too Don Joe? Or with your deeeeeep hatred expressed here, you only see red with Elephants?
Now what did I produce here on HA.
I placed the YouTube of the Donkey saying there was no Fannie/Freddie crisis. Well yes there was a crisis. We know when it started too. You argue it doesn’t matter. Why? Who made you king? KMBA! If regulations were placed on F&F in 2005 maybe things would be different today. Yet you and your puffed up attitude ignore history. So as Billy Preston wrote “Will it go round in circles”, you betcha! Did you see the Saturday Night live skit on the Bailout? Even the lefties on SNL said Donkey had a part! Even Bill Clinton took on his own party and said they were the major culprit. But these facts are lost on Don Joe!
I brought up Cap & Trade. Why? Because the insipid HA moronic idiots use Enron in their Republican arguments almost as much as Halliburton. So I
D E S T R O Y E D
Halliburton with Perini Corp in Iraq, and I bring Cap & Trade as part of Obama’s economic plan. He supports it. And Don Joe, how sweet is that? The same methods used by Enron to screw the American public are supported by the “messiah”. Here a choir in the background Don Joe?
Now Greenlining… Why do you skip that Don Joe? Just because Barry Ritholtz decides not to discuss it? Is he the argue or debate arbiter? Has any HA lefty idiot Googled it? Probably not. Why? Scared of learning something? And then see how the banks were attacked by ACORN?
Let’s go back in time. The lefty loonies here claimed the oil companies controlled prices. When I was the first on HA to bring up NYMEX and how they help set the future oil barrel price not the oil companies, your HA idiot friends couldn’t let their oil company arguments go. When the liberal MSM finally looked into NYMEX and admitted they were a big culprit, the oil company argument left HA. AMAZING. Now to you and your little mind, you couldn’t fathom Puddy being right about their control over oil prices. And yes they are in NY. And yes they were screwing the public and the Donkey in congress didn’t take them on. Well if the leftist MSM finally came around, why not Don Joe? so you make some silly argument about my argument… Great job Don Joe!
Since you forgot what Puddy said earlier, I said I hold the Republicans responsible for not taking on Barney Fag and Chris Dudd in the press to press forward their F&F regulation proposals.
Then I read one of your links “As we learn this morning via Julie Satow of the NY Sun” – well yelling loser boy will disqualify him for reading a Rupert Murdoch publication. And then you are arguing about regulation. I am amazed at the lack of commentary from the Donkey SEC members. Usually someone leaks to the liberal MSM to make Republicans look bad. Since this didn’t happen…
So Don Joe, you continue to sniff Ritholtz’s butt. I’ll continue to make money and invest wisely and give money to charities, something lost on you and your ilk. Did you see the pittance Biden gives to charities? Just like a Donkey, other people’s money not their own!
If Obama – Biden win, I am looking forward to going to court to have my mortgage principal reduced. Joe Biden told me about it in the debate.
@ 59
When someone hits himself in the head with the bat, he’s not hitting anything, with the possible exception of his brain, out of the park.
Puddy Whiff #1:
Regarding Ritholtz v Krugman, as I have repeatedly said and as Puddy has repeatedly ignored, I base my acceptance of someone’s conclusions based on the quality of their analysis. When Krugment gets it right, then, why shouldn’t people quote him? I disagree with Ritholtz from time to time (though rarely, because he’s far better than most). Does that mean I need to discount everything Ritholtz says? Of course not.
But, in the Puddy world, there are only good guys and bad guys. The good guys always get things right, and the bad guys always get things wrong. Puddy forgets that he quoted Sam Zell as one of his good guys, and that Sam Zell was woefully wrong. By Puddy’s own argument, Puddy has disqualified himself from even participating in this discussion.
Puddy Whiff #2:
Regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as I have repeatedly argued, the failures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are symptoms of the present crisis not causal. Were those failures causal, then the government’s assumption of ownership would have solved the current crisis, and we wouldn’t need an additional $700 billion dollars worth of Treasury float to solve the crisis.
Has Puddy refuted those arguments? No. Puddy hasn’t even tried. Nevertheless, Puddy continues to base is arguments on a conclusion that has been shown to be false.
Puddy Whiff #3:
Regarding Cap & Trade, Puddy’s argument is yet another version of his “good guy/bad guy” false dichotomy. Because Enron favored Cap & Trade and Democrats generally dislike just about everything Enron stood for, we’re supposed to also hate Cap & Trade.
Does Puddy bother to discuss the issues surrounding Cap & Trade? No. Why? Because Puddy hasn’t a clue as to what the issues are.
Puddy Whiff #4:
Regarding greening, I haven’t skipped over it at all. I’ve asked Puddy to show how that’s even remotely relevant to the present crisis.
Does Puddy bother to even try to show how it’s relevant? Nope. Instead, Puddy chastises me for refusing to wander off into the woods with him. Have we seen a more pathetic attempt at a cogent argument in these comment threads?
Puddy Whiff #5:
Regarding NYMEX and oil companies, Puddy’s memory is failing him. Again. He conveniently forgets both that the issue had to do with the effect of derivative securities and that Don Joe explained the economic mechanism through which those derivative securities affected the price of gas. Rather than refute Don Joe’s analysis, Puddy tried to make issue of the fact that the “NY” in “NYMEX” stands for “New York.”
Puddy Whiff #6:
While Puddy is busy blaming Democrats as a whole for this mess, and ignoring the fact that I have acknowledge the role that DLC Democrats have played, Puddy both refused to make any attempt to refute, or even acknowledge, the point I have made, several times now, that the present crisis is a failure of Republican philosophy.
Puddy Whiff #7:
Puddy closes with a personal attack directed at me, and based on Arthur Brooks’ study, about charitable giving. Puddy forgets that I’m a registered independent, and, therefore, lie outside the purview of Brooks’ study.
Puddy Whiff #8:
Were it not for folks like me doing what I have done for a living over the past two decades, there wouldn’t be enough demand for what Puddy does for Puddy to even have a job. Does Puddy thank Don Joe for this? Of course not.
Puddy Whiff #9:
Puddy claims that he would fall under the purview of the Obama/Biden proposal to reduce mortgage principal amounts for people who are in distress. This must mean that Puddy’s claims about continuing to make money and invest wisely are false, because, now Puddy’s claiming that he’s under sufficient distress as to qualify for a personal bail-out. Though, I have to say that Puddy’s incoherence isn’t at all surprising.
So, there you have it. Not only has Puddy struck out, he’s struck out three times. Not just three strikes. No, Puddy has managed an entire inning’s worth of strikes all in one comment. I think that just might break a record.
Responses to Puddy Whiffs
#1: Krugman is an ass. He was wrong on the Chads, he was wrong on investments, he was wrong Fannie and Freddie: “Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the explosion of high-risk lending a few years ago, an explosion that dwarfed the S.& L. fiasco. In fact, Fannie and Freddie, after growing rapidly in the 1990s, largely faded from the scene during the height of the housing bubble.”
#2 You excuse Fannie & Freddie – I said on HA Freddie and Fannie didn’t do lending: They bought mortgages from lenders AKA bundling, so those lenders had more cash to make more loans especially those subprime ones. Where have I said anything else?
#3 Cap & Trade – Why do I need to discuss it any further except to refute your Enron idiot friends on HA? NUFF SAID!
#4 Greenlining was part of this crisis. Other economists have said so.
#5 Don Joe, I used NYMEX for gas. You brought up the derivative securities crap. I only used them for the oil company setting the price argument. Get a grip!
#6 Apparently you still can’t read. Where did I only blame Donkey.
URL
Citation
Time and Date Stamp
#7 Personal attack on you? It’s an attack on anyone not Conservative. We are the ones who give “liberally” to help our fellow man! We give more in one year to charity than most libs do in 10 years.
#8 People here on this blog know what I do for a living and I get paid handsomely for it.
#9 Ahhh yes, Don Joe has no humor bone. All I did was regurgitate what Biden mentioned. Too bad you can’t deal.
I hit the ball out the park Don Joe. You are the one who likes to twist a comment toward your view forgetting why I delivered the original argument. You like to puff out your chest and show how great you are. I don’t fall for your debate tactics. The facts are that facts. Just because you like your libtard economist…
After having struck out three times, Puddy wants another shot at bad. Well, let’s see:
#1: Krugman is an ass.
Krugman’s character isn’t at issue. That his analysis is more often correct than wrong is, and, as a matter of fact, Krugman was dead right on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
#2 You excuse Fannie & Freddie
After quoting Krugman on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in an effort to say that Krugman “is an ass,” Puddy then retreats from making any meaningful claims whatsoever. Unfortunately, Puddy cannot both claim that Krugman was wrong about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that Puddy never said anything about Fannie Mac and Freddie Mac other than the buying of loans. Combined, Puddy’s claims at #1 and #2 are incoherent.
But, let’s put this whole business to rest. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lowered their loan standards in response to market pressures, and didn’t do so until after 2004 (i.e. after Rainnes had been ousted). By that time, the housing bubble was already well under way. Neither the math nor the timing conforms to any claim that loan buying FNM/FRE caused the present crisis. Claiming that this loan buying played anything but a peripheral role in the present crisis reveals the ignorance of the claimant.
#4 Greenlining was part of this crisis.
The only statement Puddy can muster in support of this claim is that “other economists have said so.” That’s it. No analysis, no comparison of the reasoning between economists who have differing views, nothing but a weak appeal to unnamed authorities.
#5 Don Joe, I used NYMEX for gas.
I did, indeed, bring up derivative securities, and I did so because they were relevant to the issue. Puddy didn’t want to talk about them, because doing so would mean that Puddy would have had to concede a flaw in his argument.
#6 Apparently you still can’t read.
Ah, yes. I remember things that Puddy forgets, but, apparently, that means I can’t read (I have no idea where the “still” comes from).
But, note. Puddy hasn’t addressed the main point about the failure of Republican philosophy. Puddy never will, because doing so would require him to acknowledge that his Republican masters have been reaming his backside while Puddy’s been busy carrying their water.
#7 Personal attack on you?
Puddy used the phrase “you and your ilk,” but apparently that wasn’t meant to be a personal attack on me. If Puddy can’t effectively right what he really means to say, then why does he think he can blame me for an inability to read? Note, also, that Puddy has no refutation for the point that Brooks’ data doesn’t cover independent voters.
#8 People here on this blog know what I do for a living and I get paid handsomely for it.
And people on this blog know what I do for a living. Moreover, they know that my point about interdependence, particularly between Puddy’s field of work and mine, is spot on. Yet, still no gratitude from Puddy. Does Puddy mean to say that he’s at least charitably ungrateful?
#9 Ahhh yes, Don Joe has no humor bone.
Puddy thinks I have no humor bone. Puddy doesn’t see the uproarious laughter that emanates whenever I see one of his comments. We all remember Puddy posting a link to a parody on The Onion while failing to notice that object of that parody was Puddy’s own argument.
I have no doubt that Puddy believes he hit something out of the park, but note that Puddy persists in this belief by claiming, “I don’t fall for your debate tactics.” Yup. Puddy doesn’t fall for someone pointing out that his arguments are full of shit.
Puddy says that I, “like to puff out your chest and show how great you are.” The same Puddy whose epithet-laden comments are constantly derisive of anyone who disagrees with him is crying, “Uncle,” because nasty Don Joe has the temerity to kick his ass. Not only is Puddy an idiot, he’s a hypocrite.