ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

rojimboo wrote:

Since I'm awake, and entirely bored, I decided to share a story to @DalaiLama.

There was a guy once. On a dark and stormy night. Wait, nevermind, the sun was shining.

He was quite skeptical and suspicious of all things. When told the sky was blue, he researched and googled who had said so.

Change that to say "When told that the sky was orange during 2007-2008, and he knew from personal business experience, and lots of deep analysis conducted in the intermediate period afterwards, that this was not so."

Picture the year 2048, and reading on the internet that in 2016-2018 Trump was popular with everyone, and how much silicon valley, and celebrities loved him, and that the resistance marches were a myth. From your own personal experience in the present, what sort of "expert" would convince you?

"

rojimboo wrote:

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Trump's stance protects the American economy far better than some major spat over a single death would.

This reminds me of something.

Did you know that all 3 times the Republicans had complete control of government in the last 100 years, Senate, Congress and President, for over 4 years, it has resulted in the greatest financial collapses in the last 100 years?

1.The Panic of 1907…… Markets fell over 43% before bottoming out).....Complete GOP control from 1901 to 1913
2.The Great Depression, 1929..... fueled by the unsustainable laissez-faire (unregulated) polices of the roaring 20’s......Complete GOP control from 1921 to 1933
3.The Financial crisis of 2007-2008....Complete GOP control from 2001 to 2007

In 1930, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, in an effort to alleviate the effects of the Great Depression, passed the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act. Which, raised tariffs, in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government.

Did it work? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression.

Today they have a similar debate over this. Anyone know what this is? The Laffer Curve. It says that at this point on the revenue curve, you will get exactly the same amount of revenue as at this point. This is very controversial. Does anyone know what Vice President Bush called this in 1980? 'Voodoo' economics.

http://thereformedbroker.com/2016/12/13/every-unified-republican-government-ever-has-led-to-a-financial-crash/

"

Khoranth wrote:

Wow, so regarding the financial crisis of 2007-2008, you are pretending Clinton's insane housing policies from the 90's had nothing to do with the collapse?

Clinton goes out and pushes all kinds of dumb housing policies to give people government backed mortgages they cannot afford, on a gamble that the house skyrockets in price, and they can leverage the equity to prevent bankruptcy. The banks are not interested, so Clinton sends out Janet Reno to make up fake charges of racism against banks, to force them to give out tons of garbage mortgages.

Yeah that had nothing to do with the housing collapse of 2007-2008. LOL

I do blame Bush though for going along with Clinton's idiot policies, cause he was afraid of being called racist by extremist leftists.

"

I would suggest considering why CDOs (collateralized debt obligations, derivatives) were allowed to be traded as financial instruments without holding very much collateral at all for security, then go to the Basel Agreement from there, the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act (that happened under Clinton, but was a GOP initiative passing in a GOP majority Senate and House) and the repeal of the net capital rule under Bush.

As per usual with financial crises, there is no one main cause for it, I think we can all agree on that. Nevertheless, a Dem controlled government during those times, as opposed to the laissez-faire policies of the GOP, would have prevented many of the underlying causes likely.

"

rojimboo wrote:

Ok.

There still seems to be some confusion here.

I presented correlation. You guys started imposing the causality, which I really wanted to stay away from as I think that

1. Economics is a soft social imprecise science
2. The less I get to delve into the occult mysteries of said field, the better
3. People can spend entire lifetimes investigating exact causes of past financial crises, without actually learning anything to help with future ones.
4. I expressed some of my knowledge on the matter here before already

"

I would suggest considering why CDOs (collateralized debt obligations, derivatives) were allowed to be traded as financial instruments without holding very much collateral at all for security, then go to the Basel Agreement from there, the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act (that happened under Clinton, but was a GOP initiative passing in a GOP majority Senate and House) and the repeal of the net capital rule under Bush.

As per usual with financial crises, there is no one main cause for it, I think we can all agree on that. Nevertheless, a Dem controlled government during those times, as opposed to the laissez-faire policies of the GOP, would have prevented many of the underlying causes likely.

5. Correlation does not necessarily equal causality (if this is the only thing you read, let it be that then)

Final note: Absolutely nobody has mentioned tariffs after I brought it up.

Let me get this straight. You guys seem to have all the answers that Nobel Prize winners for economics don't, about the 2008 financial crisis, yet you defend protectionist tariffs by mr. orange?

Interesting.

"

Khoranth wrote:

"

rojimboo wrote:

Ok.

There still seems to be some confusion here.

I presented correlation. You guys started imposing the causality, which I really wanted to stay away from as I think that

1. Economics is a soft social imprecise science
2. The less I get to delve into the occult mysteries of said field, the better
3. People can spend entire lifetimes investigating exact causes of past financial crises, without actually learning anything to help with future ones.
4. I expressed some of my knowledge on the matter here before already

"

I would suggest considering why CDOs (collateralized debt obligations, derivatives) were allowed to be traded as financial instruments without holding very much collateral at all for security, then go to the Basel Agreement from there, the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act (that happened under Clinton, but was a GOP initiative passing in a GOP majority Senate and House) and the repeal of the net capital rule under Bush.

As per usual with financial crises, there is no one main cause for it, I think we can all agree on that. Nevertheless, a Dem controlled government during those times, as opposed to the laissez-faire policies of the GOP, would have prevented many of the underlying causes likely.

5. Correlation does not necessarily equal causality (if this is the only thing you read, let it be that then)

Final note: Absolutely nobody has mentioned tariffs after I brought it up.

Let me get this straight. You guys seem to have all the answers that Nobel Prize winners for economics don't, about the 2008 financial crisis, yet you defend protectionist tariffs by mr. orange?

Interesting.

You do not need to be an economic genius to figure out that Clinton's insane housing policies played a role to the housing crisis.

There may be no one single cause of the 2008 housing financial collapse, but you have to be insane if you think the collapse would have been possible without the idiotic stuff Clinton did.

If we removed other factors, maybe the collapse is not as bad. If we removed the Clinton & Janet Reno factor, there is no housing collapse.

Edit: Tariffs are stupid, happy?

"

Khoranth wrote:

I literally have discussed the insane stuff Clinton & Janet Reno did already, and you have refused to acknowledge or address it. You can go back and re-read my posts, if you honestly missed it.

Edit: are you suggesting the Republicans forced Janet Reno to go out and make up fake racist lawsuits against banks? LOL

Also, you are baiting the wrong person with the Trump bashing, if you have followed my posts in this thread or elsewhere, you'd know that. Ive generally stated many times I wish Ted Cruz was president, and not Trump.

If you wanna successfully troll me you'll have to start bashing Ted Cruz

"

Background causes
Many causes for the financial crisis have been suggested, with varying weight assigned by experts.[33]

The US Senate's Levin–Coburn Report concluded that the crisis was the result of "high risk, complex financial products; undisclosed conflicts of interest; the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies, and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street."[34]
The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission concluded that the financial crisis was avoidable and was caused by "widespread failures in financial regulation and supervision", "dramatic failures of corporate governance and risk management at many systemically important financial institutions", "a combination of excessive borrowing, risky investments, and lack of transparency" by financial institutions, ill preparation and inconsistent action by government that "added to the uncertainty and panic", a "systemic breakdown in accountability and ethics", "collapsing mortgage-lending standards and the mortgage securitization pipeline", deregulation of over-the-counter derivatives, especially credit default swaps, and "the failures of credit rating agencies" to correctly price risk.[35]
The 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act effectively removed the separation between investment banks and depository banks in the United States.[36]
Critics argued that credit rating agencies[37][38] and investors failed to accurately price the risk involved with mortgage-related financial products, and that governments did not adjust their regulatory practices to address 21st-century financial markets.[39]
Research into the causes of the financial crisis has also focused on the role of interest rate spreads.[40]
Fair value accounting was issued as US accounting standard SFAS 157 in 2006 by the privately run Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)—delegated by the SEC with the task of establishing financial reporting standards.[41] This required that tradable assets such as mortgage securities be valued according to their current market value rather than their historic cost or some future expected value. When the market for such securities became volatile and collapsed, the resulting loss of value had a major financial effect upon the institutions holding them even if they had no immediate plans to sell them.[42]

"

Khoranth wrote:

I Actually answered your questions in my previous posts. Apparently you are not reading them in full.

You are clearly only here to troll.

Seriously, if you honestly want to do anything besides troll, the answers to your questions are in my posts the last few pages.