From Nobel Prize Winning Economist Paul Krugman - The Big Dither

AssHatZombie said:
I wonder if nationalizing the banks though will just put the power of government behind the fuckers already abusing us blind.

If nationalization does NOT wipe out investors, then it's just plain fascism.
Click to expand...

Stock in the banks is worthless. It's stupid for the government to give it fake value using massive amounts of taxpayer dollars. Shareholders should be wiped out, the banks should be nationalized, those who made bad decisions with their money should incur losses, but the system itself should be kept in place and stable in order to provide liquidity to the system.

They do this with small banks all the time. These plans are nothing but massive windfall to people who made bad decisions.
 
Watermark said:
Stock in the banks is worthless. It's stupid for the government to give it fake value using massive amounts of taxpayer dollars. Shareholders should be wiped out, the banks should be nationalized, those who made bad decisions with their money should incur losses, but the system itself should be kept in place and stable in order to provide liquidity to the system.

They do this with small banks all the time. These plans are nothing but massive windfall to people who made bad decisions.
Click to expand...

probably a better plan would have been to liquidate the current shareholders stocks at whatever losses they incurred. tax them on their capital gains, then sell back the shares to the american people at the current value and let the banks rebuild themselves.
 
Watermark said:
Stock in the banks is worthless. It's stupid for the government to give it fake value using massive amounts of taxpayer dollars. Shareholders should be wiped out, the banks should be nationalized, those who made bad decisions with their money should incur losses, but the system itself should be kept in place and stable in order to provide liquidity to the system.

They do this with small banks all the time. These plans are nothing but massive windfall to people who made bad decisions.
Click to expand...

I think watermark has arrived. Im 38, watermark, it took me until about 3 years ago to stop being a topspin /superfreak clone. I could tell you were an advance pupil from the get go. They will try to tell you it's all ok because you can get in on the scam too, but never sell out, young'n.
 
Oddly this is an economist that many dems point to as a huge Obama supporter. I agree with everything he says.
Also, anyone who thinks there was to much reguation on Wall street in not very sophisticated at all.
 
Topspin said:
Oddly this is an economist that many dems point to as a huge Obama supporter. I agree with everything he says.
Also, anyone who thinks there was to much reguation on Wall street in not very sophisticated at all.
Click to expand...

Krugman has been critical of Obama from the left-flank.
 
He also loves the stimulus so much he says it should be bigger. And since the stimulus is the main thing done so far maybe thats the cause of the reference.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I think watermark has arrived. Im 38, watermark, it took me until about 3 years ago to stop being a topspin /superfreak clone. I could tell you were an advance pupil from the get go. They will try to tell you it's all ok because you can get in on the scam too, but never sell out, young'n.
Click to expand...

I never believed the shareholders should receive windfall from taxpayer dollars. It wasn't a good wording to call what I believed in a "bailout". I only supported TARP because I believed that a stabilization with windfall to taxpayers would be better than one without, but now I'm not so sure. It's just too much of a waste and it frustrates me that Obama is putting up with this. Besides making the rich richer with taxpayer dollars, it also makes the stabilization and stimulus much less effective, because a hell of a lot of money is going into shareholder pockets, rather than to back up honest peoples bank accounts.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I think watermark has arrived. Im 38, watermark, it took me until about 3 years ago to stop being a topspin /superfreak clone. I could tell you were an advance pupil from the get go. They will try to tell you it's all ok because you can get in on the scam too, but never sell out, young'n.
Click to expand...

Your 38 and going on 17. YOUR A PROGRAMMER WORKING FOR A CORPORATION. So either your a person without the balls to follow his convictions and exit corporate america or your a fucking tool loser who's better at making excuses than anything else.
What's better genius, for all our flaws we butt fuck #2 country in economic competion. It's ugly sometimes like watching sausage or hot dogs being made.
I'll be waiting a long time for you to say whats better because your full of shit and clueless. You whine a lot, but you never put forth better ideas.
 
Topspin said:
Your 38 and going on 17. YOUR A PROGRAMMER WORKING FOR A CORPORATION. So either your a person without the balls to follow his convictions and exit corporate america or your a fucking tool loser who's better at making excuses than anything else.
What's better genius, for all our flaws we butt fuck #2 country in economic competion. It's ugly sometimes like watching sausage or hot dogs being made.
I'll be waiting a long time for you to say whats better because your full of shit and clueless. You whine a lot, but you never put forth better ideas.
Click to expand...

I make the world more beautiful! Because the truth is beautiful.
 
AssHatZombie said:
So then that's a no, the initial investors deserve to keep their original shares as limitless sums of taxpayer money are pumped into their concern. So they are enrichened greatly, at a loss to the taxpayers in general.

We don't need to do this to "keep lending". We don't need these SPECIFIC BANKS to survive. It's clear that all the banker conspiracies are totally true, and it's sad you support it.
Click to expand...

Find a real argument.

Nothing I've said even remotely suggests I support bankers in any regard .. in fact, my position is quite the opposite and by nationailzing banks the American people become the bankers and dictate bank policy through our elected officials.

Don't like the outcomes .. elect better people.
 
AssHatZombie said:
So specifically, you believe all current shareholders should forfeit their shares. Can I quote you on that. Is that what you believe. Please be lucid on this singular point. It's very key.
Click to expand...

Shareholders took a risk/gamble on the bank.

If the banks fail, why should taxpayers bail out shareholders for their gamble?

Why not have taxpayers bail out losses incurred at Vegas blackjack tables as well.
 
blackascoal said:
Shareholders took a risk/gamble on the bank.

If the banks fail, why should taxpayers bail out shareholders for their gamble?

Why not have taxpayers bail out losses incurred at Vegas blackjack tables as well.
Click to expand...



The shareholders should be wiped out. I was asking desh what she believes, she is unable to really say if shareholders should be wiped out, in her opinion. Read closer, nitwit.
 
Southern Man said:
Krugman was interviewed on PBS with Bill O'Reilly and at one point Bill had him cornered on one of his BS arguments and it looked like Krugman was going to start crying. What a liberal baby.
Click to expand...

Paul Krugman .. Nobel Prize winning Paul Krugman ..

.. cornered by Bill O'Reilly .. Disgraced minor pundit, wrong about everything Bill O'Reilly.

:cof1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top