[Shamou]

Originally Posted by valis

ray........

comment t'allez vous?

mon ami, have I got news for you. I'll shoot you an email here in a couple three days. Good to see you, my friend.....

Great to see you too my friend... will be looking forward for your email...

And, say Hi to the guys in the bowler room...

.

[Bastiat]

Originally Posted by iltos

here's some remedial action for ya.....it was three republicans who helped dismantle the glass-steagall act at the end of the clinton administration.

it only passed because republicans in committee caved into democratic demands to increasing the redlining provisions

so a reasonable question is....why were conservatives so desperate to dismantle glass-steagall?
my guess is that they were in bed with the financial sector
as you said earlier, a greedy bunch.

Face it Glass-Steagall was a throwback Act that caused more harm to the economy than good. It did nothing but to stifle access to capital and investment. And contrary to the liberal mantra, its repeal has nothing to do with today's recession.

Want to read about the Act:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by iltos

here's some remedial action for ya.....it was three republicans who helped dismantle the glass-steagall act at the end of the clinton administration.

it only passed because republicans in committee caved into democratic demands to increasing the redlining provisions

so a reasonable question is....why were conservatives so desperate to dismantle glass-steagall?
my guess is that they were in bed with the financial sector
as you said earlier, a greedy bunch.

Where's your support for that?

And I'm not saying there aren't some bad Republicans like there are some decent Democrats, but this is on the heads of Democrats primarily--they have controlled Congress for over two years--where is all the "change" they claimed they were going to make? What the hell is Obama doing to alleviate the situation?

As you know living in this state, a few bad apple Republicans caved in and allowed the liberals in this state to raise taxes--DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT IS GOING TO HELP US IN THIS CURRENT CRISIS???

The reason the stock market is not recovering is because investors have no faith in liberals. The people running things in this country think like Bastiat and me (that is rationally and objectively)--like us they have no confidence in these stupid liberals and their socialist policies. How do you convince someone to buy stock in a company that may face energy surcharge taxes, higher income taxes, higher employment taxes, stricter regulation, etc., etc., etc. Most savvy investors know that these policies will result in less earnings, less return on investment, and a loss in value. Of course they aren't going to invest in that. Would you?????

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Bastiat

Face it Glass-Steagall was a throwback Act that caused more harm to the economy than good. It did nothing but to stifle access to capital and investment. And contrary to the liberal mantra, its repeal has nothing to do with today's recession.

Want to read about the Act:



http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp

read it, gb, before an earlier post in a different thread, and again, before posting here....
i granted before, and will again, that the specifics of glass steagall aren't really applicable here....

but it's intent, as it turns out, still had merit....curbing rampant speculation
both you intelligent fiscal conservatives KNOW the usual suspects...your desire to make it a political football is akin to taking a thimbleful of water out of a bucket of facts and holding it up as the ocean of reality.

makes for a good discussion, tho.

[valis]

alrighty kids....play nice......see you on the morrow.

GB, as you are in the viewing audience, here's a nice link for ya.....buddy of mine down here just got one of those......thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick with my Black Shadow.

[valis]

Originally Posted by Shamou

Great to see you too my friend... will be looking forward for your email...

And, say Hi to the guys in the bowler room...

.

you like that idea, eh?

Well, they've been very busy of late, as have I.

Maybe you'll see me in print next year.

[valis]

laters, kids. bed beckoneth.

on the morrow, then.

v

[Bastiat]

Originally Posted by iltos

read it, gb, before an earlier post in a different thread, and again, before posting here....
i granted before, and will again, that the specifics of glass steagall aren't really applicable here....

but it's intent, as it turns out, still had merit....curbing rampant speculation
both you intelligent fiscal conservatives KNOW the usual suspects...your desire to make it a political football is akin to taking a thimbleful of water out of a bucket of facts and holding it up as the ocean of reality.

makes for a good discussion, tho.

Let's discuss this "curbing of rampart speculation". How would you stop such speculation? Do you think Glass-Steagall would have prevented "rampart speculation"? And just how much speculation is too much speculation as to be called "rampart"?

My point Mr. Basketweaver is that throwing around buzz-phrases like "rampart speculation" lack any real substance. They are a product of yellow journalism greedily sucked up by the masses who can't or don't have to time to really understand what is occurring.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

Where's your support for that?

for what....my guess?
read up on gramm....before he even left the senate, he had a job waiting for him at UBS (vp of their investment banking division), currently under indictment for helping to divert US clients into offshore entities to avoid taxes, something that an IRS program had prohibited.....they even ignored the advice of their own american legal council
http://abajournal.com/news/internal_...zies_warnings/
is that gramm's doing?
doubtful....the guy seems pretty ethical actually.....but it's something that his history of laissez-faire beliefs would probably support, were it not for the law.

like you, mulder, he doesn't believe that regulation serves any productive purpose in a free market economy....but unlike you, he rose to the top of the policy heap, and convinced others that the fuddy duddy glass steagall act was outdated, with archaic controls that limited the financial sector's ability to market creatively.

i believe the republicans caved into your arguement about the democrats wanting some assurance that financial products would be offered equally to the poor and/or marginally qualified because, in a laissez-faire environment, gramm didn't fully appreciate that the poor and/or marginally qualified where just the same as the wealthier/more "successful" folk....they knew how to sieze opprotunity.

or perhaps he was, like the critics of obama have maintained, blinded by his own vision....because gramm/leach/blidley was just the beginning

Gramm threw his weight behind the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which, among other things, paved the way for a boom in those nasty credit default swaps that are coming back to haunt us all. Writes Galbraith:

This, combined with other deregulatory moves by the CFTC [Commodity Futures Trading Commission], broadened the ‘swaps loophole,’ an enormous backdoor into the commodities markets, basically permitting speculators making bets off the commodities exchanges to be treated as ‘commercial interests’—like say, farmers—and hence avoid the scrutiny (including limits on the size of their bets) normally applied to financial players.

it''s not without reason that many point to the guy as the father of this fiasco.....while i feel he has some valid beliefs on corporate tax structures, and makes a good arguement for the huge compensation packages of corporate executives, he seems entirely consumed by the idealism embedded in the capitalistic spirit.....problems that cannot be soothed by free enterprise don't interest him, imo

In 1990 Gramm failed in an effort to amend the Iraq International Law Compliance Act of 1990. An earlier amendment to the act, the D’Amato Amendment, prohibited the US from selling arms or extending any sort of financial assistance to Iraq unless the President could prove Iraq was in “substantial compliance” with the provisions of a number of human rights conventions, including the genocide convention. After reading the D’Amato Amendment, Gramm introduced his own amendment to counter the human rights sanctions in the D’Amato Amendment. Gramm’s amendment would have allowed the Bush administration to waive the terms of the D'Amato Amendment if it found that sanctions against Iraq hurt US businesses and farms more than they hurt Iraq.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Gramm

{in fairness, i'll note that this wiki appraisal is sourced to samantha powers, an obama supported named to his national security council}

but the point remains....he is idealistic in his belief that capitalism is hindered only by regulation in its quest to make the world a better place -specifically the american world (he's exceedingly america-centric...doubt if fully comprehends the implications of a global economy)....and his failure to see that human nature will make a mockery of that idealism is just as bad as anything that can be presented about the idealism of the liberal mindset......

different pods, perhaps....but they are both peas.
there's enough fault in this to spread across the political spectrum

fwiw, i agree with you about the new CA "taxes"....they're disgusting....and i'm surprised (naively, i'm sure) that some of them are just illegal.

as far as investments in the market....it's got more to do with trusting the leadership of corporate america, imo.....believe what you want about the benefits of capitalism.....i'm sick of the greed it promotes when given the opprotunity......

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Bastiat

Let's discuss this "curbing of rampart speculation". How would you stop such speculation? Do you think Glass-Steagall would have prevented "rampart speculation"? And just how much speculation is too much speculation as to be called "rampart"?

My point Mr. Basketweaver is that throwing around buzz-phrases like "rampart speculation" lack any real substance. They are a product of yellow journalism greedily sucked up by the masses who can't or don't have to time to really understand what is occurring.

dunno about your yellow journalism reference wrt rampant speculation, gb.....if you've read the story of the genius at AIG who dreamt up the packaging of questionable investments, i don't what else you'd call the results it promoted.....everybody seemed to act like they were untouchable

if it strikes you as a "buzzword", then i retract it...call it just plain ol "speculation".....you got better ways to get a buzz

[buffoon]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

Mulder can go all night--just ask any woman!!!

I dunno, the ones I talked to had either never heard of you or felt that you spoke about it far too much

(I suspect Thingamaslug will be along to accuse me of sexual harrassment in the typical liberal way! )

What's sexual harrassment in the typical liberal way? Does it differ from that in typical other ways?

Nice to see you again paisan--I don't post as much with the intent to educate

Objective self appraisal is always good in that intentions should match capacity, agreed

as I do the chance to infuriate!

that would be the women you're implying we should ask?

These liberals just can't stand it when you point out the obvious--i.e., that they lack the ability to reason their way out of a fiscal paper bag!!!

Argue their way out of WHAT?

[LANMaster]

Why Are Democrats Not Being Held Accountable for ANYTHING?


The "Whites First" Party


What would you call a political organization that willingly consigned hundreds of thousands of people of color to joblessness, poverty, and social distress to satisfy the preferences of a small group of privileged white elites?

You could call them racists. You could call them oligarchs. You could call them tyrants.

You could call them Democrats.

A liberal white judge in California shut off the water supply to tens of thousand of mostly Hispanic farmers in order to satisfy the whims of a few wealthy, lily-white environmentalists. The state's two white, Democrat Senators have refused to intervene.

And Hispanics are beginning to notice.

[Comedian turned activist Paul Rodriguez] has discovered that the Progressive controlled Democratic party views Hispanics as their inferior vassals. When it comes to the interest of Hispanic farmers vs. White Environmentalist, the vassals must back down to their masters. This attitude caused Rodriguez to flip to the Republicans after seeing they don’t care about Hispanic farmers.

And unlike the RINO chorus, Rodriguez isn't advising the GOP to turn "Democrat-Lite" in order to attract Hispanic voters.

You need to attract more of me, or else you’d be an endangered species. … You know, we have so much in common. A lot of the values that this party espouses, we espouse. We believe strongly in family. We believe life is sacred.”

It's high time someone began calling out the Progressive Democrat Left on their blatant racism.

A quick quiz:

1. Who cracked a joke about Ghandi running a gas station?
2. Who compared blacks to "regular Americans"
3. Who said, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent."
4. Who ran campaign ads using the image of Willie Horton to scare white voters?

Answer: Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, and Al Gore.


"Don't you 'ma'am' me, boy."


OWNAGE