The Drive-a-Toyota Act

Read the cite you chose to excerpt.

The WHOLE cite, including Putz' comments.

If you can't figure it out, you are beyond help.

And get that smile fixed before someone with a clue wipes it off your face.

 

Sure.

 

I've read the whole thread, and at no time did you even attempt to explain any
of your bizarre comments of name-calling, strange cocaine allegations, or even
of your "faux news." If you disagree, please feel free to cite!

 

If you cannot tell from the context, you are either purposely being
obtuse or you are beyond help.

Over and out, moron.

 

Heh, Usenet. You *could* be like a character out of a Woody Allen movie
who pretends to be the owner of a car that was just bumped *or* you
could be an apprentice at some right wing think tank. Maybe a
legitimate think tank fellow (if there is such a thing) with too much
time on his hands. Same for me. We don't know. That's why I used the
race track analogy and it applies here again. We each have our favorite
touts and sources that inform and support our particular leanings so why
get too personal? We can be more efficient (you should appreciate that)
by simply posting links instead of long winded exchanges.

I have a few friends who are quite wealthy (one who recently ran for
public office as a republican) and they don't share your analysis that
the tax breaks were good for *everyone*. Nor have they invested any of
their windfall. Myself, I find *these* analysis's of the tax breaks and
Reaganomics to ring true.

http://tinyurl.com/2dcn5f
http://www.buzzflash.com/hartmann/05/07/har05007.html


However, the race continues. There is no winners circle in the game of
history and economics. The lead changes, people congratulate themselves
and high five each other but soon the lead changes again.

For example a year ago you no doubt would have been lavishing praise on
the genius of subprime loans and the refinancing craze. Investment banks
bundling mortgages of subprime borrowers and selling them off to
investors such as hedge funds, mutual funds and other institutional
investors. Brilliant. Bookies call that "laying off dangerous bets."

This week the European Central Bank loaned 130 *billion* at 4 percent
and the Federal Reserve added 24 billion in temporary reserves to the
U.S. Banking system. Heh, proof of genius's at work and a system so
brilliant that for the first time we have something that human greed
can't screw it up. And as the housing market collapses there is the
usual chorus of conservatives blaming the consumers. Just like with
credit card debt.

For "Wall Street" see above. As for friends of Bush profiting from war,
I thought it was common knowledge. Haliburton, Kellogg Brown & Root,
Carlyle Group, etc..


One thing I've noticed is that dedicated true blue conservative
economists don't seem to ever make a connection between policy and its
effect on the general population or even democracy itself. Some sort of
narcissism subtly expressed? The backslapping and the transfer of
wealth continues but what lies in store for the recorders of history?

Of course, when I say "true blue conservative economists" I exclude the
Bush's and other Aristocrats and representatives of the ruling class.
Their tactics to undermine democracy and enrich themselves do seem
timeless as per the historical example in my prior post.

Here's a piece that resonates with me that you no doubt will find much
fault with: (meanwhile, on to the next race)

http://tinyurl.com/2ykgbk

 

Thanks for the brevity. Nothing like coatails to accentuate depth.

 

Not sure why a smart person would think sub-prime loans were a good idea
as you imply. What you just did is called a strawman argument. Nice try.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

So says the person that was only able to provide a simple series ofo non-sequitur,
begging the question, and ad-hominem fallacies.

 

I'm not a right winger, I am an economist. There is a huge difference.

Wow, alleged anecodoal evidence! So did these "friends" take the money *not* confiscated by the
government and stuff it under their beds, if it wasn't being invested?

Would you really like to return to Jimmy Carter's America and it's malaise?

Your source conveniently hides the fact that tax REVENUE nearly doubled after the Reagan tax cuts by
forgetting to point out Congress was spending ludicrously in the 1980s, and outspent Reagan's budget 7 of
8 fiscal years.

If you get a raise of double your income and increase your spending over three times by spending
wastefully, it's not your raise's fault that you're going broke.

So you are claiming that the entire subprime mortgage market is not a legitimate one? Would you call for
its extinction?

What about refinancing? Should homeowners not be permitted to seek a more favorable rate to pay in your
utopia?

There will always be market abnormalities and corrections. Look how tiny and insignificant they are
today compared to decades ago.

Really? You equate investing with bookies? Interesting, but a strawman fallacy, at best.

So are you saying that the central banking systems should not take action? Sounds like they are doing
their job.

Yeah, if you go ring up huge amounts of credit card debt buying 'stuff' that you can't pay for, someone
*made* you do it, and it's society's fault!

 

Isn't everyone nowdays? Economists and Foreign Relations experts from
tax sheltered think tanks.

Calm down, its *anecdotal*. They're just sitting on it mostly via
savings. Does that expand the economy and create jobs. Oh well, live
and learn. *You're* the economist.

You seem to have missed my point about no winners circle.

And set the stage for poor Bush senior to panic and blow it while at the
same time setting the stage for all those retards in the Clinton
administration to build up a surplus. I swear, the more I look into
this economics business the more I find myself thinking about the
parallels to religion. So many preachers, so many interpretations. So
little consensus and so much ridicule.

Econ 101?

Is *that* your interpretation? Hmmm, are you saying today that its all
hunky dory? (I guess my presumption of what you would say last year is
correct). BTW, is putting words into peoples mouths part of the job of
an economist?

Now you're going a little beyond silly.

I think I alluded to that already. Part of my main point.

Actually, its a *perfect* analogy. Bookies "lay off" high risks bets.
Either to other bookies or have a carrier go to the track itself. They
learned the value of this strategy the hard way.

You *do* seem to have trouble understanding what I'm saying. If you
have a spouse I'll bet he/she just *loves* arguing with you.

To borrow some style from you.... So...., you think predatory lending
and lending institutions literally writing the laws that govern them is
just part of the wonderful miracle of the free market system?

Note:

I did a quick check of how many helpful (on topic) posts you and Bill
have offered to my favorite newsgroup and found it is none. So..., Bill
is toast (so annoying anyway) and I'll give you a parting shot if you
wish. (matter of respect for others with problems that actually pertain
to the name of the newsgroup)

 

Hey idiot - I don't normaly post on ...gm or ...toyota. You're
cross-posting, so this is showing up on groups I don't normally post to.
If I had to choose on whether you are dishonest, or stupid, I choose
mostly dishonest, but also a good bit of stupid. Case in point: Citing
one week variation in stock market to make broad conclusions.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

If only! We'd all be in better shape. Unfortunately too few people understand even basic personal
finances let alone simple macro. I see this even in college students. The best I can do is make sure that
*my* students are challenged and are much further ahead than their average peers.

Absolutely it does!!! When you save money by putting it in a bank, you enable that bank to make loans to
others, including homes, businesses, construction, etc. Some of that money saved or earned through those
investments is placed in a bank again. This is what is known as the multiplier effect, and it is a very
powerful function of our economy. This is also part of the reason why there is not some fixed amount of
wealth that must be moved around. Wealth can be and is created, including expansions of the money supply.

That is why you can use the luxury of hindsight to examine economies over many decades and see what has
happened and its effects. If "poor Bush senior paniced and blew it" is that on-par with some of the great
economic failures? Of course he didn't panic and blow anything. We know that Clinton for the most part
took a laissez faire attitude with monetary policy and that led to good results. (I really am party
agnostic). His fiscal policies were pretty damned lousy in the first two years, but his own fiscal
policies (as well as his Treasurer) became much more conservative after the new Congress was sworn in in
1995, and that led to great results too, for a while.

Usually macro comes after 101.

I didn't put any words into mouths, I merely asked a question. Your response was only another question.

Not as much as complaining about a "refinancing craze." I'm sure glad I was able to re-finance my
properties, it has saved me handsomely.

I'll leave to your expertise of how bookies work..... Packaging loans (to the standards of
quasi-government institutions) has enabled millions of homeowoners to own their properties for decades.

No, I understand what you're saying and it is a series of non-sequiturs. Complaining about the central
banks doing their job doesn't merit a sarcastic comment aboout "geniuses" or "human greed."

A strawman question, as it doesn't relate to what I wrote. The people elect law-makers.

I'm not surprised. How many of yours did you find helpful? It is fascinating to read complaining about
off-topic in an off topic post

Bill knows more about LH cars than almost anyone here and is always eager to help out, offer suggestions,
and answer questions. You might learn something, if you were interested.

Gosh, thanks!

Such as all of your other posts?