GM announces layoffs 2000 jobs in OH and MI one day AFTER the election

Althea said:
I didn't see this post. Was it from you? I have quite a few idiots on ignore.

If you're asking me about deficit spending, we've been doing it throughout history. In fact, every business does it. The issue is that Republicans are the ones who criticize it, only to double down when they get into office. They cut taxes, and increase spending. Then...throughout history, a Democrat cleans up the mess while Republicans point fingers.
Click to expand...

You said deficit spending is never good. That is 100% at odds with Keynesian economics. You didn't respond if you were a supporter of the gold standard or not
 
Althea said:
Obama did. He started with the Stimulus, that Republicans refused to fund as they clamored to beg for same in individual states.

Then, he put controls into place (many that were blocked to this day)to keep another banking disaster from happening.
Click to expand...

Oh dear lord. What controls are in place to prevent another banking disaster?
 
tsuke said:
my ideal situation would be high tariffs on firms that outsource and state level minimum wage so that companies in the coast with higher minimum wages would outsource inland. Historically coastal areas (like the nile cities in egypt, carthage, rome, london) are always wealthier than landlocked ones. We have to force the wealth to flow inward.
Click to expand...
Yes. Because import/export issues were much cheaper for those on the coast. In this country, inland is typically Big Agriculture, which enjoys govt. handouts.
 
Althea said:
Obama did. He started with the Stimulus, that Republicans refused to fund as they clamored to beg for same in individual states.

Then, he put controls into place (many that were blocked to this day)to keep another banking disaster from happening.
Click to expand...

You just completely contradicted yourself here claiming the stimulus was good after just saying we should never deficit spend
 
cawacko said:
Ah, I see. So when he said we should never deficit spend he really meant deficit spending for tax cuts is different than deficit spending for infrastructure. Is there a cheat sheet anywhere with other meanings like that I can learn?
Click to expand...
Except I never said that. I criticized Trump's planned tax cut/spending program. As you have already been shown, there is a difference between cutting taxes and increasing spending, and increasing revenue to shrink the divide between income/spending.

Every Republican administration in your lifetime has opted for the former, with catastrophic results.
 
cawacko said:
Other than the Fed, if you believe they are to blame, how could a politician done anything once the market started tanking?
Click to expand...
They could have enforced regulations on mortgage brokers to ensure that the high risk instruments, like credit default swaps, were covered by mortgage brokers capital assets and preventing them from making loans to unqualified applicants. In addition recognition early on that it was a credibility problem and the government would have to buy the bad loans or risk the banking industry taking down the rest of the market. Those would have gone a long way to preventing the crisis. Instead they did nothing.
 
Althea said:
Except I never said that. I criticized Trump's planned tax cut/spending program. As you have already been shown, there is a difference between cutting taxes and increasing spending, and increasing revenue to shrink the divide between income/spending.

Every Republican administration in your lifetime has opted for the former, with catastrophic results.
Click to expand...

That is nothing more than a massive pile of false bullshit. What is it about Liberals that compels them to be such sociopathic liars? First off, Administrations cannot spend anything; if you had a formal worthwhile education instead of leftist indoctrination you would know this.

Secondly, the ONLY time the Federal budget was balanced over the last six decades was when a Republican congress finally controlled the House and Senate during BillyBob's philadnering Presidency.

No wonder you vote Democrat; you're a clueless idiot on steroids.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
They could have enforced regulations on mortgage brokers to ensure that the high risk instruments, like credit default swaps, were covered by mortgage brokers capital assets and preventing them from making loans to unqualified applicants. In addition recognition early on that it was a credibility problem and the government would have to buy the bad loans or risk the banking industry taking down the rest of the market. Those would have gone a long way to preventing the crisis. Instead they did nothing.
Click to expand...
They did nothing for obvious reasons. Wall St. owns the nation, and the govt was happy to take lobbyist money for the next election cycle. Every administration loves to point to the market success as some proof that their policies worked.

They believe it will keep their side of the aisle in power for another 8 years. Unfortunately for them, the facade came crashing down just before the election.
 
cawacko said:
You just completely contradicted yourself here claiming the stimulus was good after just saying we should never deficit spend
Click to expand...
You're going to have to multi quote the chain of posts if you want to pass off this shit as fact.
 
Mott the Doofus said:
They could have enforced regulations on mortgage brokers to ensure that the high risk instruments, like credit default swaps, were covered by mortgage brokers capital assets and preventing them from making loans to unqualified applicants.
Click to expand...

Dear uninformed wonder; it was the Democrats in Congress that insisted on forcing mortgage companies to give loans to unqualified applicants.

But I am amused by the equally stupid premise that the Federal Government should protect investors from making really stupid investments. Funny stuff.

Mott the Doofus said:
In addition recognition early on that it was a credibility problem and the government would have to buy the bad loans or risk the banking industry taking down the rest of the market. Those would have gone a long way to preventing the crisis. Instead they did nothing.
Click to expand...

Dear uninformed wonder; please view the video below if you are still confused as to why Congress didn't act quickly enough to prevent a potential mortgage meltdown. Also please note the asinine race hustling Democrats during the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac hearings before Congress in 2004. I hope that after explaining this a thousand more times, it will finally sink in to brain dead leftists:

 
Althea said:
They did nothing for obvious reasons. Wall St. owns the nation, and the govt was happy to take lobbyist money for the next election cycle. Every administration loves to point to the market success as some proof that their policies worked.

They believe it will keep their side of the aisle in power for another 8 years. Unfortunately for them, the facade came crashing down just before the election.
Click to expand...

Now you are sounding like DeshTard.

retardt.gif
 
Althea said:
After January? None. For now, we have a skeleton of Dodd/Frank. You should wait until lunch to start drinking.
Click to expand...
1) it's never too early to start drinking

2) at least have a modicum of understanding on the topic before talking trash. What has Dodd-Frank done to prevent another too big to fail?
 
cawacko said:
1) it's never too early to start drinking
Click to expand...
Agree...if that's your thing. Your problem is that you drunk post a little too often, and you look silly.

at least have a modicum of understanding on the topic before talking trash. What has Dodd-Frank done to prevent another too big to fail?
Click to expand...
Excellent idea. Now read up, and we'll talk when you're sober.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top