Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Recent Economic Decline NOT, repeat, NOT a failure of Capitalism

Capitalism is a system in which absurd, self-destructive behavior severely punishes whoever is guilty of it. Such people suffer losses, go bankrupt, and lose their ability to have significant further economic influence. Their example then serves as a lesson to others to avoid such behavior.

If this is not exactly what just occurred, then I’m a ripped-out body builder with a huge… ego.

This recent debacle was a SUCCESS of capitalism, in that it weeded out the people STUPID enough to go along with the plan of giving loans to people who could not afford them. That’s what capitalism is, and that’s what capitalism does. The only reason that the normal capitalist cycle became a catastrophe this time around is because the government interfered, created an external influence that rewarded stupid behavior, then repealed a law that allowed the banks to hide their stupidity by securitizing the bad loans. Sans governmental influence, this puppy would have never even happened. Without government influence, the idea would still exist, but those very few stupid enough to go along with it would have been weeded out early, not having any place to hide their stupidity.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

The problem wasn't in giving people loans they couldn't afford it was ALLOWING the people who controlled the money to make lots of money by loaning it to people who couldn't afford it.

But really, you people discount the many other aspects of this mess and instead focus on the simple-minded pursuit of blaming individuals, particularly the ones you perceive as always causing the problems, those at the lower end of the income scale.

What about the credit default swaps? The rating agencies who fraudelently rated the CDOs and MBSs better than actuality? What about AIG, WaMu, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch? Did they fail because they loaned money to poor people who didn't deserve it? NO

No, this was a free-for-all of greed and the ripe mortgage market was simply one of the vehicles. There was a lot of money looking for a way to gain huge returns. When they couldn't find it legally, they turned to maginally legal and sometimes outright illegal activity.

it all stems (ironic) from the conservative mindset/paradigm that making money and getting rich are paramount. You know the con/republican credo: "Get as much as you can, all that you can, as FAST as you can and don't give a second thought to how you do it."

It was a culture of GREED promoted and condoned by the dominant paradigm of conservatism, the gutter ideology from HELL. They're even PROUD of it, boasting that the basis of capitalism is the harnessing of greed and self-interest. So they CULTIVATED and NURTURED the absolute WORST instincts in humans and the result has been DISASTER.

If I was in charge there wouldn't be a conservative not in chains in this country. There would be very public trials for the rich, for the Wall Streeters and for the republicans including bush. They would be sent to camps or prison, I don't care which, and we would quickly instill in people a deep sene of loathing for them and for their ideology. And fear that if their greed got the better of them they too would end up ostracized and in chains.

Schteveo said...

"The problem wasn't in giving people loans they couldn't afford it was ALLOWING the people who controlled the money to make lots of money by loaning it to people who couldn't afford it."


This is all I read. He blames the PROFITS, not the simple fuckers who signed the paper. And I mean BOTH parties, the lenders and the borrowers both over extended. This person is delusional.

Hell I couldn't stop, it was too weird. Sun Tzu said, "Know your enemy". So I read on.


"There would be very public trials for the rich, for the Wall Streeters and for the republicans including bush. They would be sent to camps or prison..."


Hey, brainless, the Cambodians, and the people of the Balkans are holding trials RIGHT now for people who thought like this. You can do this, but the backlash is usually deadly for the perpetrators.

Check this out.

Dickhead

Blue said...

HLF said "here would be very public trials for the rich, for the Wall Streeters and for the republicans including bush. They would be sent to camps or prison......"


sounds like HLF is a disciple of Chairman Mao, this stuff is straight out of the little red book

Anonymous said...

If they wear glasses, kill them.

Spider said...

Bullseye Blue!

He/she/it isn't delusional Steve. It's just spewing forth the standard communist line. It's clear this puke is not simply a liberal, (although it does have the liberal trait of reversing facts) but a full-blown commie.

nerd said...

There's plenty of blame to go around. Bernie Madoff, he of the $50 billion Ponzi scheme and a registered Democrat, contributed to the following Democratic Party politicians:

Massachusetts Rep. Ed Markey

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry

New York Rep. Carol Maloney

Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy

New York Rep. Charles Rangel

New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine

New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg

Former Missouri Sen. Dick Gephardt

Former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley

To be fair, he also contributed to the following evil, blood-dripping GOP stalwarts:

Former Texas Rep. Jack Fields

Arizona Sen. John McCain

Former N.Y. Rep. Vito Fossella

Former Louisiana Rep. "Billy" Tauzin

Former N.Y. Rep. Daniel Frisa

Former N.Y. Sen. Alfonse D'Amato

He also took the following Hollywood hot shots for millions:

Steven Spielberg

Jeffrey Katzenberg

Eric Roth

Kevin Bacon & Kyra Sedgwick

He also got in the pockets of Sandy Koufax and the Wilpon family who own the Mets, as well as Larry Silverstein, who developed the World Trade Center.

HLF's protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, it seems that the evil, depraved Republican party and conservatives in general have no corner on the greed market. Fifty billion dollars ain't hay! It appears that when it comes to swindles, the Democrats do as well as the Republicans.

This just in from Open Secrets, Robert Allen Stanford, a fellow Texan and the latest fund manager to be accused of fraud, contributed through his company PAC, $2.4 million to candidates for federal office, with 65% of that going to Democrats. Stanford and his wife, Susan have given $931,000 of their own money since 2000 with 78% of it going to Democrats.

Spider said...

Facts to a leftist are like sunlight to a vampire!

nerd said...

What about the credit default swaps?

I doubt that you have any idea what CDSs are.

If I was in charge...

You're not in charge, will not be in charge in the near future and indeed never will be in charge of anything of even miniscule importance. You couldn't get past a primary election espousing the idiotic drivel that passes for conversation in your fervid imagination.

Anonymous said...

Good attempt at deflecting.

My knowledge of CDSs has little bearing on my point which is that the meltdown was about much more than people getting home loans they couldn't pay back. CDSs were yet another derivative created by greedy Wall Street crooks that had the effect of destroying our economy. And how did they get away with creating these exotic financial instruments? Republican-created deregulation and inattention to what was going on. Neglect and mismanagement- the republican way.

Next time try addressing the issue. If you can.

nerd said...

My knowledge of CDSs has little bearing...

It has at least some bearing on the conversation because you come in here and throw around terms about which you are ignorant. The only issue on which you can hang your hat is that the Republican Party in the preson of George W. Bush created the current financial disaster. Let's break it down again. I'll type slowly and use short words so that you can keep up.

I have previously stipulated that, in my opinion your premise is true. MOVE ON! That stipulation does not grant you carte blanche to revile and insult people who disagreed with that damn fool, Bush. Again, if you were another ambulance chaser opposing me in an adversarial court action, I would ask the judge to either instruct you to move on or to hold you in contempt for being argumentative to no purpose. If it were a criminal case, hizonner might declare a mistrial due to your incompetence as counsel for the prosecution. Your argument is rendered moot and yet you persist in hurling insults based on your only claim to fame, the failure of the domestic economic policies the Bush administration.

You speak of economic matters of which you are ignorant. You throw out unemployment rates, approps of nothing, unsupported by any other economic data such as GDP growth and inflation, and think we should take you seriously. You say that you are going to ignore my comments because I am unreasonable. Again, mi amigo, if you decide to ignore me, it will be because you have no rebuttal for those facts I have presented to the court (e. g. the political contributions of $50 billion Ponzi-master, Bernie Madoff and R. Allen Stanford being made mostly to Democrats). If you truly believe the bilge that you come here and spew forth, then you should be able to do a much better job of defending your position. I used to eat assistant district attorneys with your poor debating skills for breakfast.