The Tea Party thread!

[Boba Ben]

 

[youbastards]

KD's futzing just gets better and better...

 

[Taibhse]

Had the Clinton administration and the Democratic Party never forced banks to lend to sub-prime borrowers, no one would have had to bundle high-risk loans with rational financing and sell them as derivatives. Even someone as dim as Bush knew that, but the same Democrats insisted on the safety of their affordable housing racket. When the FM's sold a trillion dollars worth of sub-prime mortgages between '06 and '07, they broke the banks, and everyone who bought from them.

None of that would have happened in a free market. Nor would regular recessions and depressions, the likes of which are created under the kinds of consumption driven policies employed by your pet bureaucrats and central bankers.

Wrong.. the bundling of bank loans to create tradeable bonds, started in the mortgage industry in the 1970s.. long, long before Clinton.
Clinton's mistake was actually de-regulation.. ie. repealing the The Glass-Steagall Act (1933).. by signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (1999)

.. except The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, was a Republican piece of legislation, to get the banking conglomerate Citigroup off the hook for violating The Glass-Steagall Act.
Phil Gramm - Republican, Texas
Jim Leach - Republican, Iowa
Thomas J Bliley Jr - Republican, Virginia

.. so a Republican de-regulation Bill created the potential for disaster.. and virtually all of the speculative bubble and the collapse occurred on Dubyah's watch, a Republican pro-free markets administration: January 20, 2001 – January 20, 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis


As I mentioned earlier you have yet to provide a genuine, real world, working example of a laissez faire government.. because there isn't one and there never will be.. the Tea Party trades on a completely fictional model that likes to present a weird, Disneyfied amalgamation of the American War of Independence (with Washington cast as the British) and the 1950s.. but the only way you could genuinely compete in a 'true' modern, laissez faire manufacturing market (you cited Say's Law earlier) is to accept Chinese salaries and working conditions.

Except the Tea Party is never going to try selling that particular 'truth' to the US electorate.. and good luck with running a country the size of the USA without a major banking sector.. except since you don't trust Banksters you will have to regulate them.. but you don't believe in regulation.. you are all about laissez faire.. Catch 22, eh?

Tea Party laissez faire actually works like this:
1. USA trades unrestricted with the rest of the world, under terms favorable to the USA
2. USA restricts the rest of the world trading with the USA to protect US business, under terms favorable to the USA
.. except that isn't laissez faire, its called Protectionism.. it didn't work in the 1930s and it will not work now.

Don't worry they have made a complete hash of it in Europe as well.

 

[crows]

is anyone ready for lunch?

 

[Taibhse]

is anyone ready for lunch?

Lobster tails.. omnomnom!.. why does your lunch have Liam Neeson's face on it?

 

[SnakeDoctor]

Wrong.. the bundling of bank loans to create tradeable bonds, started in the mortgage industry in the 1970s.. long, long before Clinton.
Clinton's mistake was actually de-regulation.. ie. repealing the The Glass-Steagall Act (1933).. by signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (1999)

.. except The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, was a Republican piece of legislation, to get the banking conglomerate Citigroup off the hook for violating The Glass-Steagall Act.
Phil Gramm - Republican, Texas
Jim Leach - Republican, Iowa
Thomas J Bliley Jr - Republican, Virginia

.. so a Republican de-regulation Bill created the potential for disaster.. and virtually all of the speculative bubble and the collapse occurred on Dubyah's watch, a Republican pro-free markets administration: January 20, 2001 – January 20, 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis


As I mentioned earlier you have yet to provide a genuine, real world, working example of a laissez faire government.. because there isn't one and there never will be.. the Tea Party trades on a completely fictional model that likes to present a weird, Disneyfied amalgamation of the American War of Independence (with Washington cast as the British) and the 1950s.. but the only way you could genuinely compete in a 'true' modern, laissez faire manufacturing market (you cited Say's Law earlier) is to accept Chinese salaries and working conditions.

Except the Tea Party is never going to try selling that particular 'truth' to the US electorate.. and good luck with running a country the size of the USA without a major banking sector.. except since you don't trust Banksters you will have to regulate them.. but you don't believe in regulation.. you are all about laissez faire.. Catch 22, eh?

Tea Party laissez faire actually works like this:
1. USA trades unrestricted with the rest of the world, under terms favorable to the USA
2. USA restricts the rest of the world trading with the USA to protect US business, under terms favorable to the USA
.. except that isn't laissez faire, its called Protectionism.. it didn't work in the 1930s and it will not work now.

Don't worry they have made a complete hash of it in Europe as well.

SnakeDoc

 

[Taibhse]

SnakeDoc

 

[crows]

Lobster tails.. omnomnom!.. why does your lunch have Liam Neeson's face on it?

that aint Liam Neeson boy, that right there is Kurt Russell don't you know nothin'

 

[The Ween]

I love political debate when you're sitting face to face and having a drink or two, but on a forum it gets too heated.

I will say though that the Tea Party isn't the answer. Anymore I don't know what is.

 

[RavenEye]

In before the lock.

 

[RavenEye]

 

[devilof76]

Wrong.. the bundling of bank loans to create tradeable bonds, started in the mortgage industry in the 1970s.. long, long before Clinton.
Clinton's mistake was actually de-regulation.. ie. repealing the The Glass-Steagall Act (1933).. by signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (1999)

.. except The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, was a Republican piece of legislation, to get the banking conglomerate Citigroup off the hook for violating The Glass-Steagall Act.
Phil Gramm - Republican, Texas
Jim Leach - Republican, Iowa
Thomas J Bliley Jr - Republican, Virginia

.. so a Republican de-regulation Bill created the potential for disaster.. and virtually all of the speculative bubble and the collapse occurred on Dubyah's watch, a Republican pro-free markets administration: January 20, 2001 – January 20, 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis


As I mentioned earlier you have yet to provide a genuine, real world, working example of a laissez faire government.. because there isn't one and there never will be.. the Tea Party trades on a completely fictional model that likes to present a weird, Disneyfied amalgamation of the American War of Independence (with Washington cast as the British) and the 1950s.. but the only way you could genuinely compete in a 'true' modern, laissez faire manufacturing market (you cited Say's Law earlier) is to accept Chinese salaries and working conditions.

Except the Tea Party is never going to try selling that particular 'truth' to the US electorate.. and good luck with running a country the size of the USA without a major banking sector.. except since you don't trust Banksters you will have to regulate them.. but you don't believe in regulation.. you are all about laissez faire.. Catch 22, eh?

Tea Party laissez faire actually works like this:
1. USA trades unrestricted with the rest of the world, under terms favorable to the USA
2. USA restricts the rest of the world trading with the USA to protect US business, under terms favorable to the USA
.. except that isn't laissez faire, its called Protectionism.. it didn't work in the 1930s and it will not work now.

Don't worry they have made a complete hash of it in Europe as well.

You have certainly made a hash of it. This is why we can't have nice things. People such as yourself posit straw men and burn them, oblivious to the live human being inside. I'd say you are well intentioned, but I like humans, personally, and all I can see is a psychotic idiot.

 

[devilof76]

https://spectator.org/articles/42211/true-origins-financial-crisis

Glass-Stegall repeal was a red herrring because no other example of related deregulation could be tied to and blamed for the disaster made of the affordable housing scam. Clinton gave the CRA of 1977 teeth it never had by tying bank ratings to the number of high-risk mortgages they facilitated. Your narrative is about as accurate as the myth that lack of government regulation caused the Great Depression. Under genuine scrutiny, it's pure gibberish.

 

[crows]

i was going to post a funny pic but seeing this thread and the Batman 4 thread being open still is making me paranoid........

 

[Lejuan]

I love political debate when you're sitting face to face and having a drink or two, but on a forum it gets too heated.

I will say though that the Tea Party isn't the answer. Anymore I don't know what is.

So long as it's just Devil and Taibhse going at it it'll remain robust but good natured. As soon as others get in and add their two cents it'll degenerate toot sweet.

 

[Taibhse]

I love political debate when you're sitting face to face and having a drink or two, but on a forum it gets too heated.

I will say though that the Tea Party isn't the answer. Anymore I don't know what is.

Yeah, I seldom bother with political parties but I enjoy debating economics with friends in the pub, I've even got a mate who moved to the US, who comes back to visit his family at Xmas and lecture me on the evils of Londonistan and the EUSSR during the traditional Xmas Eve session in the boozer.. he is extremely bad at remembering to buy a round, it's very entertaining!

that aint Liam Neeson boy, that right there is Kurt Russell don't you know nothin'

hmm.. I'm not convinced, are you sure they didn't sell you a Neeson lunch, claiming it was the Russell lunch, to pocket the $3 difference?

...People such as yourself posit straw men and burn them, oblivious to the live human being inside. I'd say you are well intentioned, but I like humans, personally, and all I can see is a psychotic idiot.

That's a Wicker man, not a straw man...

 

[Taibhse]

https://spectator.org/articles/42211/true-origins-financial-crisis

Glass-Stegall repeal was a red herrring because no other example of related deregulation could be tied to and blamed for the disaster made of the affordable housing scam. Clinton gave the CRA of 1977 teeth it never had by tying bank ratings to the number of high-risk mortgages they facilitated. Your narrative is about as accurate as the myth that lack of government regulation caused the Great Depression. Under genuine scrutiny, it's pure gibberish.

When you remove the regulatory legislation..The Glass-Steagall Act (1933).. that was set in place to stop a Crash like 1929 happening again and promptly get a rerun of massive speculation, followed by another major Crash, that is not a red herring.

Its extremely amusing that Tea Party fans insist on looking for a left wing conspiracy.. because the Occam's Razor answer ie. Deregulated markets don't care if there is a crash, since the idea is too make as much money as possible and scarper without getting chucked in jail, is too embarrassing.. the red herring is trying to blame Clinton.. who stopped being President six years of Republican overseen free market speculation before the Crash of 2007...

 

[devilof76]

I'm not a Tea Party fan. Sub-prime caused the crash. Clinton opened the door for sub-prime and lack of regulation did not cause the 1929 crash. The only money made in 2008 was the fiat flood that followed when the alleged best minds in the financial world chose to bail out those who would have drowned in a free market where no help would have been forthcoming (and no sub-prime lending would ever have been seen as rational by anyone other than the kinds of legislative shysters who promoted it in the first place).

 

[crows]

is this the longest a political thread has been opened?

 

[devilof76]

Not even close. It's been so long, I don't think they know what to do with it.