Recession; is it engineered by the "elite" to shape society in their image?

[wbcoleman]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

This is considered to be one of the greatest economics works of the twentieth century, right up there with Keynes' General Theory.

[Gnosisquest]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

This is considered to be one of the greatest economics works of the twentieth century, right up there with Keynes' General Theory.

You say, and the economical situation is monitored by the same people advocating this book. Now I'm sure there are excuses but what I am saying is that the real cause are Kooch related along with other sociopaths and no economic tome is going to alter their "solutions".

[wbcoleman]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

This is considered to be one of the greatest economics works of the twentieth century, right up there with Keynes' General Theory.

You say, and the economical situation is monitored by the same people advocating this book. Now I'm sure there are excuses but what I am saying is that the real cause are Kooch related along with other sociopaths and no economic tome is going to alter their "solutions".

Whom do you think "advocates this book"?

And have you been repeatedly referring to "the wealthy families" who invested in Bear Stearn, Bank of America, Washington Mutual, Wachovia Bank, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Lehman Brothers, et al?

[Gnosisquest]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

This is considered to be one of the greatest economics works of the twentieth century, right up there with Keynes' General Theory.

You say, and the economical situation is monitored by the same people advocating this book. Now I'm sure there are excuses but what I am saying is that the real cause are Kooch related along with other sociopaths and no economic tome is going to alter their "solutions".

Whom do you think "advocates this book"?

And have you been repeatedly referring to "the wealthy families" who invested in Bear Stearn, Bank of America, Washington Mutual, Wachovia Bank, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Lehman Brothers, et al?

You for one advocate the book.
No I'm not referring to investors that stay in investments when they start sliding. That, if I'm right is just another way to get other people's assets.

[wbcoleman]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

This is considered to be one of the greatest economics works of the twentieth century, right up there with Keynes' General Theory.

You say, and the economical situation is monitored by the same people advocating this book. Now I'm sure there are excuses but what I am saying is that the real cause are Kooch related along with other sociopaths and no economic tome is going to alter their "solutions".

Whom do you think "advocates this book"?

And have you been repeatedly referring to "the wealthy families" who invested in Bear Stearn, Bank of America, Washington Mutual, Wachovia Bank, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Lehman Brothers, et al?

You for one advocate the book.
No I'm not referring to investors that stay in investments when they start sliding. That, if I'm right is just another way to get other people's assets.

Actually I don't think that I "advocated" the argument of the book particularly strongly, I simply noted [accurately] that it is a classic work of 20th century economics.

So, who are these "families" that, in your view, engineered the crash?  Did they profit from it as you suggest?

[Ted S]

That the Government cause recession is absurd, the Government regulations such as EPA, Wall Street, the Banking industry, minimum wage, OSHA etc has to be greatly improved! Regulation of the dope industry (drug companies) has to be enforced and also greatly improved.

Regulations sometimes actually achieve the result they are after but too often they also produce a host of unintended consequences.  Liberals are great at envisioning the intent of some regulation but are not good at seeing the negative side effects.  Thomas Sowell calls this the inability to see beyond stage 1.  The democrat party is the party of stage 1 thinking.

Like any good disaster there are many contributing factors but the top 2 for the recession are:

1. The Federal Reserve's artificially low interest rate.
2. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's government guarantee of success.

Interest rates are prices.  Prices are signals and incentives.  Low prices entice people buy when they wouldn't under normal circumstances.  Think of any really good sale price and the hoards of people who will stand in line for what is being sold.  I have a personal story of this phenomena.

The federal reserve sets interest rates arbitrarily.  Had the market been allowed to set interest rates (the price of borrowing money) the rates in all likelihood wouldn't have been so low and certainly not that low for such a long time.  In a nutshell, the Federal Reserve set the price of borrowing so low for such a long time that they created a huge amount of malinvestment in housing stock.  People bought more and businesses built more than was truly needed because the price was so low.  This artificial pricing is called regulation and it was done by the government.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are/were government sponsored entities.  GSEs.  These two quasi-private businesses had guarantees from the government that any financial gains that they made, they would keep, and and losses that they made, would be covered by the taxpayers.  They were/still are in a win/win situation.  There was everything to gain and nothing to lose.

This put Fannie and Freddie in a spot where they took abnormally high risks because their success was guaranteed.  More properly put, there was no chance of failure.  It was like being told that any winnings at the casino you could keep but if you lost everything, not to worry, somebody else would make you whole again -- in the case of Fannie and Freddie, that somebody was the taxpayer.

This unique privilege Fannie and Freddie enjoy is called government regulation.  Had those two quasi-private companies been part of a truly free market their leaders would have know that overly risky lending practices would have resulted in their demise.

And that's just to name two.

[kentay]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

The possibility of a few wealthy families manipulating the society has not been refuted but if you want to discuss Nobel prize literature regarding economics that is not the only "tome".
The current recession looks to have been manufactured in order for these wealthy families to cease assets by those that work for a living.

Are you referring to "the wealthy families" who invested in Bear Stearn, Bank of America, Washington Mutual, Wachovia Bank, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Lehman Brothers, et al?

Coleman: What make you so much better than me that you can issue question after question without answering some in return?

Gnosisquest, I have known WBC a long time and he has always been that way. Short little childish flippant answer, that say nothing, because his game is to frustrate you. When he plays his little game that doesn't add anything to the thread I drop out and let him play. I haven't posted much with Ted but when he gets flustered because of your post sticking it to him and he can't answers he runs off by saying he too busy to answers now, but will later return and answers, if you don't have time you shouldn't post at that time in my opinion because it's so easy to never come back because you might have to think and open up your opinions. I have posited with Woody a long time and when you get the best of him the cursing words start flying because of his immaturity. RWE I don't know that much but I bet he young and immature because of him not knowing any history and his use of expletives that are usually wrong like his Johnson commit. I have posted with Clara a long time and she post on subject with through-out post on subject with good information, and rarely if ever gets mad and immature. kentay

[Ted S]

I haven't posted much with Ted but when he gets flustered because of your post sticking it to him and he can't answers he runs off by saying he too busy to answers now, but will later return and answers...

In the recent Ayn Rand thread that you started I admitted that I hadn't actually watched the videos that you posted because I was too busy but planned to watch later that same night. Well, I actually did watch them that very night, all 30 minutes of them so I upheld my end of the deal.  I invested over 30 minutes to your post but when I asked you twice if you had viewed the videos yourself all I got was silence.  Seems like you're a big violator of your own principals Kentay.

As for all of the other threads here, there are way too many of them and they wander about so much and there is so little evidence that other people actually take the time to read and understand what I have written that it doesn't make sense to devote much time to them.  I guess I could adopt your MO and just cut-and-paste articles that other people have written but that's unoriginal and boring.

I prefer to save my ammo for battles that interest me rather than firing drive-by shots in every skirmish.  I'm eager to engage in true and honest dialog but all of these "Tastes Great!, Less Filling!" threads are just tiresome.

[kentay]

I haven't posted much with Ted but when he gets flustered because of your post sticking it to him and he can't answers he runs off by saying he too busy to answers now, but will later return and answers...

In the recent Ayn Rand thread that you started I admitted that I hadn't actually watched the videos that you posted because I was too busy but planned to watch later that same night. Well, I actually did watch them that very night, all 30 minutes of them so I upheld my end of the deal.  I invested over 30 minutes to your post but when I asked you twice if you had viewed the videos yourself all I got was silence.  Seems like you're a big violator of your own principals Kentay.

As for all of the other threads here, there are way too many of them and they wander about so much and there is so little evidence that other people actually take the time to read and understand what I have written that it doesn't make sense to devote much time to them.  I guess I could adopt your MO and just cut-and-paste articles that other people have written but that's unoriginal and boring.

I prefer to save my ammo for battles that interest me rather than firing drive-by shots in every skirmish.  I'm eager to engage in true and honest dialog but all of these "Tastes Great!, Less Filling!" threads are just tiresome.

Ted, If that was only true all you offer is your opinion and you rarely back up anything with facts.  I did answers your post I just had not gotten down to it. But one thing I didn't do is  run off because I didn't have the time. I like you Ted because I see that you once did had a softer heart that hasn't fully turn to full hard like concrete. kentay

[Ted S]

Ted, If that was only true all you offer is your opinion and you rarely back up anything with facts.

Believe it or not, I actually agree with your perception here.  I generally don't post links to other websites and label them as fact because too often they are just opinion.  This may come as a shock to you Kentay but not everything on the internet is true.  Because of the vast amounts of garbage, I try to offer logical explanations as to why I hold my positions using my own words rather than just posting links to sites you won't visit anyway.

I did answers your post I just had not gotten down to it.

Huh?  Sounds a lot like my admission that I hadn't viewed the videos because I didn't have the time right then.  I eventually did though, how about you?  I'll ask again; have YOU watched the Ayn Rand videos that YOU posted?

I like you Ted because I see that you once did had a softer heart that hasn't fully turn to full hard like concrete. kentay

Well, I'll admit that I was soft-in-the-brain when I was a lot younger but I do my share of charity work today.

You still don't get it Kentay.  You still think I'm the hard-hearted one because I'm not on board with the idea of FORCING others to fund YOUR charities.

[Gnosisquest]

Do the Right-wing-nuts ever answer?

Thanks for the "compliment"!  See reply #8.

I saw that Coleman, what is it about this "tome" that you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Monetary_History_of_the_United_States

The possibility of a few wealthy families manipulating the society has not been refuted but if you want to discuss Nobel prize literature regarding economics that is not the only "tome".
The current recession looks to have been manufactured in order for these wealthy families to cease assets by those that work for a living.

Are you referring to "the wealthy families" who invested in Bear Stearn, Bank of America, Washington Mutual, Wachovia Bank, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Lehman Brothers, et al?

Coleman: What make you so much better than me that you can issue question after question without answering some in return?

Gnosisquest, I have known WBC a long time and he has always been that way. Short little childish flippant answer, that say nothing, because his game is to frustrate you. When he plays his little game that doesn't add anything to the thread I drop out and let him play. I haven't posted much with Ted but when he gets flustered because of your post sticking it to him and he can't answers he runs off by saying he too busy to answers now, but will later return and answers, if you don't have time you shouldn't post at that time in my opinion because it's so easy to never come back because you might have to think and open up your opinions. I have posited with Woody a long time and when you get the best of him the cursing words start flying because of his immaturity. RWE I don't know that much but I bet he young and immature because of him not knowing any history and his use of expletives that are usually wrong like his Johnson commit. I have posted with Clara a long time and she post on subject with through-out post on subject with good information, and rarely if ever gets mad and immature. kentay

Thank you Kentay:
The Republican mentality is difficult for me to understand, it is as if they are intent on undermining society. They deregulate Fanny/Freddy and blame regulations when they eventually blow it. They want to remove the unions in order to lower wages and privatize everything so they create a blame game with the unions. It is as if they have no public conscience and feel no responsibility for their fellow man.
Trickle down economy as an example is still advocated by some even though logically and historically it has been proven to be disasters. Do they not care or are they irresponsible or just plain stupid?

[Ted S]

The Republican mentality is difficult for me to understand...

The Democrat mentality is easy for me to understand.  It's all based on good intentions and doing what feels right but it's not based in logic or reason or truth.

You're stuck in a world of stage-one thinking Gnosisquest.  You seem like you are above average in intelligence but below average in wisdom.  Do yourself a favor and give this a read, but with an open mind:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/62868280/Thomas-Sowell-Thinking-Beyond-Stage-One

The book is available many public libraries.

[RWE]

The Republican mentality is difficult for me to understand, it is as if they are intent on undermining society. They deregulate Fanny/Freddy and blame regulations when they eventually blow it.

Maybe you should consider the possibility that democrats are intent on undermining society.
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-88093
Bush Fought to Regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae 5 Years Ago Until Democrats Stopped Him

[Gnosisquest]

The Republican mentality is difficult for me to understand, it is as if they are intent on undermining society. They deregulate Fanny/Freddy and blame regulations when they eventually blow it.

Maybe you should consider the possibility that democrats are intent on undermining society.
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-88093
Bush Fought to Regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae 5 Years Ago Until Democrats Stopped Him

To be honest I don't believe either party are the answer to any real problems.
Greed and politics don't mix and we have two parties in which far too many of the representatives are only concerned about what is in it for them.

[RWE]

Yes, but with this thread you posited the possibility that the recession was engineered by "elites." You can't argue that point without accepting that the Democrats were to blame for creating the housing bubble that triggered the recession. And that the Republicans tried in vain to prevent the disaster. If your position is that it was engineered, then it was done without republican collusion.

2003 Article-BUSH&MCCAIN TRIED TO REFORM FANNIE, BUT BARNEY FRANK SAID FANNIE'S OKAY, DEMS REJECT!
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-90601