Then I apologize for calling you a Boomer.
Federal deficit grows by 32% to $900B
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
Then I apologize for calling you a Boomer.
Standing Ovation!
You're opinion isn't different, its flat out lie.
cawacko
Well-known member
From Bernanke himself saying the Fed deserves the blame. I understand in your position it is hard to blame the government. There are some who blame the crash on Clinton's financial deregulation but I don't. I don't believe that played a role. What did okay a role was both the Clinton and Bush administration pushing for higher levels of home ownership. Combine that with the Feds easy money policies and voila.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...sis-marksjarvis-1015-biz-20151014-column.html
I can't guarantee I will stop using it. They need to see how ignorant, hateful and racist they are.
It's a word used on this board frequently.
They set the precedent long ago. Not me.
Another massive pile of bullshit. The deficits rose exponentially when Democrats took over the House and the Senate. Obama merely grabbed that ball and ran with it.
Liberal hypocrite morons on the left downplayed the deficits by proclaiming they were for the "right" cause and "necessary."
You never get much of anything right do you snowflake?
If you bothered to actually read the link you posted, which you clearly didn't, you'd see that it wasn't Fed policy Bernanke said deserved blame, it was the Board of Governors failure to acknowledge the risk banks were taking.
So nowhere in there does Bernanke say the Fed is to blame for the Crisis. He says the Fed acted too late to do anything about it. But nowhere in there does he say the Fed caused the crisis, just that its response to what was happening was slow and that it "didn't do enough to control risky lending". So I guess in your world, cops deserve blame for crime because they didn't do anything to stop the criminal before they acted illegally.
Now, you know that the risky lending was the result of the Bush Administration dramatically weakening underwriting standards for subprime loans, right? So what Bernanke is saying is that the Fed should have acted sooner to control that risky lending. But that's not saying the Fed is to blame for the crisis. It's saying the Fed's response to what was happening was too slow.
So you're doing the lazy, typically Conservative thing of vomiting forth a link that you didn't read closely.
So you shit forth a link that you misrepresent because you're too fucking lazy or you lack the moral character to actually comprehend what it says.
You say the Fed caused the crisis because they didn't act fast enough to control the risky lending?!?!?!??!
What a fucking idiot.
I get that. I really, truly do.
But I think it's just bad optics, even if what you're doing is paraphrasing.
But I totally agree with you in that's what they really think and believe. I just think it works to our advantage to have them use the slurs exclusively.
You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you upside your thick empty skull snowflake. Claiming it was Bush is moronic and laughably idiotic.
Here are the FACTS:
What Caused the Mortgage Crisis?
https://www.thetruthaboutmortgage.com/what-caused-the-mortgage-crisis/
Who Was to Blame for the Subprime Crisis?
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/07/subprime-blame.asp
The Cause of the 2008 Financial Crisis
.......Why would banks make such risky loans? The answer is that the Clinton administration pressured the banks to help poor people become homeowners, a noble liberal idea. Also the Clinton Justice Department threatened banks with lawsuits and fines ($10,000 per application) for redlining (discrimination) if they did not make these loans. Also ACORN (Obama’s community service organization) was instrumental in providing borrowers and pressuring the banks to make these loans.
To allow Fannie Mae to make more loans, President Clinton also reduced Fannie Mae’s reserve requirement to 2.5%. That means it could purchase and/or guarantee $97.50 in mortgages for every $2.50 it had in equity to cover possible bad debts. If more than 2.5% of the loans go bad, the taxpayers (us) have to pay for them. That is what this bailout is all about. It is not the government paying the banks for the bad loans, it is us!!
https://www.aim.org/guest-column/the-cause-of-the-2008-financial-crisis/
Watch as Democrats attack the regulator and race hustle in the hearings in 2004 trying to get a handle on the impending crisis; yes the DEMOCRATS are the reason nothing was done folks:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Hearings 2004
Into the Night
Contributor
evince
Truthmatters
shes a black female
Into the Night
Contributor
Never said it was.
Only for importers of certain products. Those products can be manufactured here, and they are beginning to be manufactured here again.
Inventory is not an 'output' or a 'production'. Inventory is simply inventory.
People will still buy a product, whether it was built here or built overseas.
I doubt it. It's actually causing some companies to start here and relocate here, meaning they will be hiring U.S. workers.
Never said it was because of housing.
Maybe.
Nope. You lay the blame for this one firmly on the Chinese government. They OWN the steel and aluminum industries there. The stuff they are selling for supercheap is due to the taxes they impose on their own people to do it.
Ups and downs are a normal part of any economy. What causes our extended downturns is the Federal Reserve and price controls.
Yes you did. But fine, whatever.
No they're not "beginning to be manufactured here". That's a lie. You just made that shit up on the spot. No overseas production was moved here. It'll never happen anyway.
Stop.
Inventory most definitely is an output.
It's an output of production.
Stop.
Into the Night
Contributor
No, they are paid by importers. Consumers do not have to buy from importers.
Never said it did.
I do understand exactly what it is. It's an oligarchy that imposes price controls on money. Oligarchies don't work. Neither do price controls.
Central banks are not needed or desirable.
Not if the price of that product is inflated because of tariffs, and certainly not if they don't have a job because there was no demand for whatever product they produced because you rushed to get it all out ahead of the tariffs.
Not one company has relocated anything to the US from overseas.
Not.
One.
Instead, several companies have moved production out of the US; BMW, Harley, Carrier among several others.
Yes you did. But, whatever. I know it's hard for Conservatives to keep their arguments straight from post-to-post.
Definitely. We know because we just lived through that shit 10 years ago. Subprimes went bad, housing construction slowed, unemployment rose, foreclosures started because people didn't have jobs to pay their mortgages. So when you end up cutting production because you flooded your product to avoid the tariffs and there's no inventory orders, that means layoffs are a-comin'.
GOVERNMENTS DON'T PAY TARIFFS, IDIOT.
Consumers do.
When you impose tariffs on imported raw materials, the importer here pays those tariffs. They then pass the cost of those tariffs on to consumers. All you're doing is causing higher prices and job loss.
Last edited: