Why is Saudi Arabia doing this?

[iatrogenic]

If it were a misstatement, wouldn't that qualify as original?

 

[AC]

I just gave up figuring out the point of those posts. Capitalism isn’t perfect but compared to fascism communism, socialism, or anarchy. I’ll take capitalism all day!

 

[Musburger1]

I just gave up figuring out the point of those posts. Capitalism isn’t perfect but compared to fascism communism, socialism, or anarchy. I’ll take capitalism all day!

Is it really capitalism when a central bank chooses who gets bailed out, who gets preferential loans (zero interest rates), and doesn’t have to disclose what they are doing? Is Social Security capitalism? Is Medicare? Don’t you think that whenever your supposed “capitalism” faces collapse, the government implements massive centrally managed socialism to keep it alive?

 

[AC]

No, I don’t think that at all. We over reacted to the virus and treated it based on media hysteria. Then the left moved in to keep the economy shut down for as long as possible! Capitalism is not the problem, Liberalism/ socialism is.

 

[Monahorns]

Is it really capitalism when a central bank chooses who gets bailed out, who gets preferential loans (zero interest rates), and doesn’t have to disclose what they are doing? Is Social Security capitalism? Is Medicare? Don’t you think that whenever your supposed “capitalism” faces collapse, the government implements massive centrally managed socialism to keep it alive?

No it is government intervention in capitalism which is the path towards socialism. Several of those things are fascism by definition.

It's awful.

 

[Musburger1]

No it is government intervention in capitalism which is the path towards socialism. Several of those things are fascism by definition.

It's awful.

That is correct. We got a taste in 2008-2009 and next we are going to get ten fold more. It doesn’t matter if Bush, Obama, or Trump is President or who controls Congress. The majority of the money printing is going to flow to the big banks either way. How the scraps is distributed is fought between the so called right and left. This more closely resembles fascism, with a touch of socialism to appease the masses under a faux label of capitalism.

 

[iatrogenic]

Is it really capitalism when a central bank chooses who gets bailed out, who gets preferential loans (zero interest rates), and doesn’t have to disclose what they are doing? Is Social Security capitalism? Is Medicare? Don’t you think that whenever your supposed “capitalism” faces collapse, the government implements massive centrally managed socialism to keep it alive?

Explain how a central bank decided who got preferential loans? Who, exactly, doesn't have to disclose what they are doing?

Did the government interfere in the market? Was communism responsible for the whole damn mess?

 

[Musburger1]

Explain how a central bank decided who got preferential loans? Who, exactly, doesn't have to disclose what they are doing?

This goes way back.
The Fed's 'Secret' $1.2 Trillion Bailout of Wall Street
Secret Fed Loans Gave Banks $13 Billion Undisclosed to Congress
Remember the titans: Wall Street elite got $1.2T in secret loans - InvestmentNews

Did the government interfere in the market? Was communism responsible for the whole damn mess?

By definintion, the existence of the federal reserve is market interference. Setting interest rates, adding and pulling liquidity are day to day activities that guide market direction. But beyond that:
1. The Fed is going to buy ETFs. What does it mean?
2. How the Federal Reserve’s Junk Bond Purchases Will Actually Work – 24/7 Wall St.
3. These stocks may bounce as the Federal Reserve buys junk bond ETFs, according to Jefferies

Its not just that the fed is purchasing corporate bonds of varying quality. They are making these purhases well above market price and sometimes above par.

 

[iatrogenic]

I didn’t realize we were talking about 2008 again. Why not go back to the Great Depression too?

My point is that government interference caused this problem. Specifically the Commies in China. Add government mandated shutdowns in the US to the equation. In short, government sucks. Capitalism is the only system that works well.

 

[Musburger1]

I didn’t realize we were talking about 2008 again. Why not go back to the Great Depression too?

My point is that government interference caused this problem. Specifically the Commies in China. Add government mandated shutdowns in the US to the equation. In short, government sucks. Capitalism is the only system that works well.

So, now you are admitting the United States doesn’t operate under capitalism. Welcome to the club. You’ve had an epithemy? Now that you’ve acknowledged that government interferes, how do propose ending the practice? Abolish the Fed? Elections? Ha. The incestuous relationship between government and big business and it’s power only grows. It is a systemic problem which is now terminal.

 

[iatrogenic]

I have never said the US operates under a purely capitalistic system. I have always stated that government regulations and actions are killing us. That’s why Trump cutting regulations and taxes is a good thing. We just need more of it.

For the record, I’ve never had an “epithemy”. I have had an emergency appendectomy.

 

[Musburger1]

I have never said the US operates under a purely capitalistic system. I have always stated that government regulations and actions are killing us. That’s why Trump cutting regulations and taxes is a good thing. We just need more of it.

For the record, I’ve never had an “epithemy”. I have had an emergency appendectomy.

In general, cutting regulations and red tape is good. But the idea that markets self-regulate is nonsense. Big oil made waste dumps in portions of the Amazon rain forest because there were no authorities to stop them. The same would happen here if there was no enforcement mechanism. There is basically no anti-trust enforcement anymore. Also, when Clinton reversed Glass-Steigal the result helped fuel the financial crises in 2008 along with other non-regulated practices.

 

[iatrogenic]

In general, cutting regulations and red tape is good. But the idea that markets self-regulate is nonsense. Big oil made waste dumps in portions of the Amazon rain forest because there were no authorities to stop them. The same would happen here if there was no enforcement mechanism. There is basically no anti-trust enforcement anymore. Also, when Clinton reversed Glass-Steigal the result helped fuel the financial crises in 2008 along with other non-regulated practices.

You make claims that don't hold up to scrutiny. What fueled the crisis in 2008 was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae buying mortgage backed bonds despite repeated warnings from the Bush Administration. It is government that f's up the system.

 

[Musburger1]

You make claims that don't hold up to scrutiny. What fueled the crisis in 2008 was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae buying mortgage backed bonds despite repeated warnings from the Bush Administration. It is government that f's up the system.

There were several factors. Fraud at many levels. Rating agencies knowingly rated high risk bonds as low risk. Originators turned a blind eye (or abetted) faulty applications. Adjustable rate mortgage rate instruments helped otherwise unqualified buyers get in. If all of this (and more) doesn’t illustrate to you that markets don’t self-regulate, then nothing ever would.

 

[iatrogenic]

There were several factors. Fraud at many levels. Rating agencies knowingly rated high risk bonds as low risk. Originators turned a blind eye (or abetted) faulty applications. Adjustable rate mortgage rate instruments helped otherwise unqualified buyers get in. If all of this (and more) doesn’t illustrate to you that markets don’t self-regulate, then nothing ever would.

Why regulate when the government is going to relieve you of any responsibility by buying the crap you're selling?

 

[Monahorns]

Yes. The banks wouldn't be so risky if the Fed wasn't there to bail them out. They bail them out with OUR money when THEY makes mistakes.

Of course banks wouldn't act perfectly. But with a market, those banks die, the good banks buy up their assets on the cheap and life goes on.

 

[Musburger1]

Why regulate when the government is going to relieve you of any responsibility by buying the crap you're selling?

You don’t self-regulate because regulation (self imposed or government imposed) cuts into profit. As you or your industry become wealthier and more politically powerful, you hire lobbyists and recommend “experts” to preside over government agencies. Over time, these agencies often no longer represent the public, but instead protect the very industries they were intended to monitor. They might erect fees and regulations that restrict competition while simultaneously providing loopholes for the company (industry) they came from. Then they leave the agency and return to private business and reap the benefits from their “public service.” This is where we are.

 

[Driver 8]

The banks wouldn't be so risky if the Fed wasn't there to bail them out. They bail them out with OUR money when THEY makes mistakes.

Privatized gains, socialized losses

Who wouldn't roll the dice on those terms? The system is f**ked

 

[Monahorns]

You don’t self-regulate because regulation (self imposed or government imposed) cuts into profit.

Profit is the signal that your business is operating efficiently, the more profit the more efficiently. However, if you are getting short term profit based on reckless decisions, your business will fall apart soon. You will go out of business. Bankruptcy is the only regulation needed.

As you or your industry become wealthier and more politically powerful, you hire lobbyists and recommend “experts” to preside over government agencies. Over time, these agencies often no longer represent the public, but instead protect the very industries they were intended to monitor. They might erect fees and regulations that restrict competition while simultaneously providing loopholes for the company (industry) they came from. Then they leave the agency and return to private business and reap the benefits from their “public service.” This is where we are.

Totally agree. That is why you can't rely on the government to regulate industry. You need an open market with competition. Competition is the only thing that really holds companies accountable. Maybe a private certification organization can help, but you have to have people competing, because competitors are the only ones that have incentive to expose error.

 

[iatrogenic]

You don’t self-regulate because regulation (self imposed or government imposed) cuts into profit. As you or your industry become wealthier and more politically powerful, you hire lobbyists and recommend “experts” to preside over government agencies. Over time, these agencies often no longer represent the public, but instead protect the very industries they were intended to monitor. They might erect fees and regulations that restrict competition while simultaneously providing loopholes for the company (industry) they came from. Then they leave the agency and return to private business and reap the benefits from their “public service.” This is where we are.

Clearly you have never had OSHA visit a job site or manufacturing plant of yours, dealt with employment regulations, minority business requirements, taxes upon taxes upon taxes, ERISA, the SEC, and thousands of other bullshite regulations, laws, and edicts.

 

[Musburger1]

If you are getting short term profit based on reckless decisions, your business will fall apart soon. You will go out of business. Bankruptcy is the only regulation needed.

Not necessarily. It might be cheaper for me to dump my excess waste into the river rather than to implement some process that is environmental friendly. The downstream effect might hurt someone else’s livelihood (all the aquatic life in the estuary dies) or maybe some people will get poisoned. But my bottom line will be better. Until someone forces me to stop why should I? Profit is all that matters, right? Maybe I’ll be run out of business when the locals burn down my plant. But maybe not.

 

[Musburger1]

Clearly you have never had OSHA visit a job site or manufacturing plant of yours, dealt with employment regulations, minority business requirements, taxes upon taxes upon taxes, ERISA, the SEC, and thousands of other bullshite regulations, laws, and edicts.

You should have lobbied to have one of your cronies appointed to run OSHA.

 

[iatrogenic]

If I ever get that chance......

 

[Musburger1]

If I ever get that chance......

It will cost you. Evidently you haven’t contributed a satisfactory amount to enough politicians. Reach deep in your pocket and practice your free speech.

 

[Monahorns]

Not necessarily. It might be cheaper for me to dump my excess waste into the river rather than to implement some process that is environmental friendly. The downstream effect might hurt someone else’s livelihood (all the aquatic life in the estuary dies) or maybe some people will get poisoned. But my bottom line will be better. Until someone forces me to stop why should I? Profit is all that matters, right? Maybe I’ll be run out of business when the locals burn down my plant. But maybe not.

If you are polluting other peoples land and harming people, your business will called to account very quickly, regardless of if there are government regulations or not.

 

[Monahorns]

Clearly you have never had OSHA visit a job site or manufacturing plant of yours, dealt with employment regulations, minority business requirements, taxes upon taxes upon taxes, ERISA, the SEC, and thousands of other bullshite regulations, laws, and edicts.

Clearly, your competitors have more political power than you. You would be benefitted by a private option.

 

[Musburger1]

If you are polluting other peoples land and harming people, your business will called to account very quickly, regardless of if there are government regulations or not.

See Love canal. See Ford Pinto. People died unnecessarily because the business decision was that law suits were less damaging to the bottom line than cleaning up or than recalling and redesigning the configuration. The objective of regulatory organizations is to protect the public. Doesn’t always work as intended, but left unchecked you get Fukushima’s, Amazon rain forest destruction, Love canal’s and so forth.

 

[Monahorns]

Mus, aren't there caps on the amount you can sue for damages? This is even more so if there are government regulations. If you pass the regulation, you are protecting from too high of lawsuits.

At every turn, I see the government standing in the way of justice not enacting it.

 

[Musburger1]

Mus, aren't there caps on the amount you can sue for damages? This is even more so if there are government regulations. If you pass the regulation, you are protecting from too high of lawsuits.

At every turn, I see the government standing in the way of justice not enacting it.

You may be right about caps. Pick your poison; governmental bureaucracy or government/big business corruption. Or both. Ones as bad as the other.

 

[LongestHorn]

A fleet of oil tankers loaded with oil from Saudi Arabia is en route to the United States, the Wall Street Journal reports; those tankers, which departed prior to the OPEC+ agreement last week, contain seven times as much oil as Saudi Arabia sent in a typical month last year.