Unemployment is 3.9 percent

Nope...who told you that?

The dotcom bubble was caused by tax cuts:

To provide more compelling evidence that the 1997 tax cut affected volatility (and mitigate concerns about omitted correlated variables), we focus on cross-sectional tests which are designed to detect the differential responses in return volatility of stocks with different characteristics. We hypothesize that the effect of a capital gains tax change on stock return volatility should vary depending upon dividend policy and the size of the unrealized capital losses (or gains). Consistent with expectations, we find that non- and lower dividend-paying stocks experienced a larger increase in return volatility than high dividend-paying stocks. We also find that stocks with large unrealized capital losses had a larger increase in return volatility after a capital gains tax rate reduction than stocks with small unrealized capital losses. However, we do not find a similar relation with unrealized capital gains.
https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-the-dot-com-bubble-began-and-why-it-popped-2010-12

Lie. It was caused by the Fed. Tax cuts do not cause a crash.
 
You jsut keep lying because you know you can't hang in this debate with me.

If I was you, I would be linking to that same post over and over again until it was addressed.

So what you do is say something dumb, then when asked to prove it, lie about already doing so, and then send everyone on a wild goose chase to find nothing.

I see right through you.

Assumption of victory fallacy. RQAA.
 
You lied about the cause of the collapse, you lied about providing proof, you lied that someone else did that work, and now you're lying some more.

This debate is over. I clearly won.

Assumption of victory fallacy. Attempted proof by fundamentalism.
 
No. DEMOCRATS shut down the economy. Not Trump.

The economy wasn't shut down in most red states.

So Democrats are not the reason the economy tanked, you and Trump are the reason because you lied about COVID and those lies caught up with you in a major way.
 
Not about HUD.

You were the one who was saying that Democrats, when they had no power, were giving people loans they couldn't pay back.

But what actually happened was that Republicans, who had power, gave loans to people who couldn't pay it back because Republicans wanted to make the economy look like it was growing because of tax cuts in 2004, when it was really growing because of debt.
 
I do, but I'm not going to write a book for you.

No you don't, because anyone who does know what the Fed is and what it does would respond with the same thing I said: The Fed lends money to banks and establishes the interest rate.

The Fed does not "regulate banks"...that is the job of the regulators in the Commerce and Treasury Departments.

The reason you won't write a book is because you don't even know where to start.
 
This is a lie, you didn't.
Argument of the Stone fallacy.
Not on this thread or any others.
Argument of the Stone fallacy. RQAA.
But you said it did, by handing out subprime loans, so maybe you wanna go back to the drawing board?
Contextomy fallacy.
Never said it was, but I'm sure if we go back through enough of your posts, we'll find one where you did.
I don't do your footwork for you. Attempted proof by fundamentalism.
 
Back
Top