Did high gas prices trigger a global recession?

[eyeball]

A country that will be doing very well come mid 2010 and will still be a superpower, far better than what the USSR could ever do.

Leftist lawmakers tried to force banks to lend to poor people and look where it got them. They won't be trying that experiment with socialism ever again.

What leftist lawmakers and what laws? You should also be able to come up with a banker or two who stuck by their principles and went to jail rather than obey the law you're going to provide a link to.

[blueblood]

What leftist lawmakers and what laws? You should also be able to come up with a banker or two who stuck by their principles and went to jail rather than obey the law you're going to provide a link to.

link

link

This is why gov'ts should stay out of the banks business.

The Canadian banks who aren't forced to lend to people who can't pay are the only banks that are successfull.

Socialism sucks.

[eyeball]

The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.

Not force, but encourage there is a difference don't you think? By the way the neutrality of your source is in dispute, it says so right at the top of the page. No doubt it will be for a long long time.

The Canadian banks who aren't forced to lend to people who can't pay are the only banks that are successfull.

Socialism sucks.

So you're saying that Canada is more right-wing than the socialist US?

Man, this crisis is shaking right-wing confidence in things in ways that nobody ever could have imagined. I would suggest you right-wingers are far less psychologically prepared for what's happening than us lefties. No doubt you'll be trying to stuff us into labour camps before we try to stuff you into...Kumbiya camps or something.

Edited November 23, 2008 by eyeball

[msj]

So you're saying that Canada is more right-wing than the socialist US?

Clearly the US is more socialist:

CNBC Reports Government could buy $100+ Billion in Citigroup Assets

Nothing like picking winners and losers in business.

Edited November 23, 2008 by msj

[ReeferMadness]

And over time more technology and innovation will allow us to gather other sources of materials, see Wild Bill's post. This has happened throughout history. Oil has only been used widely for 150 years.

Maybe technology will save us from ourselves again. Or maybe not. History repeats itself except when it doesn't. Meanwhile, we're throwing the dice on some future generation's lives.

With respect to Wild Bill, I don't see anyone mining asteroids nor has anyone claimed that what's on them will replace all of what we're currently suing up down here.

And a central planning socialist garbage system is any better? The USSR couldn't even bloody feed themselves and they were a world super power. Nope socialism sucks. And if you want any proof of that, look at the living conditions of a person in Alberta vs. Venezuela vs. Norway. The average Albertan has a much better lifestyle and you can take that to the bank.

As mentioned previously, you need to learn what Socialism is before you try to criticize it.

Venezuela is a basket case from way back so I don't think it's a fair comparison. If you're claiming the average Albertan has a much better lifestyle than the average Norwegian, why don't you back that up with facts? In particular, maybe you could compare the lifestyle of low income Albertans vs. low income Norwegians.

When the banks are forced by law to grant loans or be in serious trouble, they sort of have to give them. How about the government stays out of the bank's business so they can loan money to people who can actually afford to pay them.

The Community Reinvestment Act was enacted in 1977. Why did it take so long for it to cause problems? Read this link

The USSR thought they were perfect examples of socialism, where are they today? You name one socialist country that has better living conditions than Alberta. Nope socialism is crap, utter crap. People have no incentive to innovate and grow, everybody is the same - poor, and rich countries have no desire to invest money there. Individual people know how to run their finances better than any government.

Stop droning on about things you know little about and get yourself an education. The USSR was simply another way to achieve privilege for a few while the majority toiled away. Over time, people became aware of the big lie that it was all about socialism and the system withered away from within. Read Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

[ReeferMadness]

link

link

This is why gov'ts should stay out of the banks business.

The Canadian banks who aren't forced to lend to people who can't pay are the only banks that are successfull.

Socialism sucks.

Blueblood, did you by any strange chance actually read the links you put in your posts? If you did, you might have noticed that Government Policies (inlcuding the CRA) was mentioned as only one of nine factors contributing to the sub-prime mess and even at that there was controversy over how much of a factor it was. Why don't you take an honest look at the evidence before you post more of this drivel?

[Wild Bill]

With respect to Wild Bill, I don't see anyone mining asteroids nor has anyone claimed that what's on them will replace all of what we're currently suing up down here.

A google on 'asteroid mining' gives many, many links. Here's one that's easy for the layman;

http://www.howstuffworks.com/asteroid-mining.htm

It doesn't matter if you or I are up on this. It only matters to those prepared to make the money.

I've always wondered why the environmental movement not only refuses to embrace space development but actually seems quite negative towards it. After all, it would solve virtually all the problems environmentalists seem so worried about.

Maybe they just want us to suffer. Or perhaps they don't like the idea of progressive folks being able to just completely and absolutely leave them behind! Some folks can only get an audience when the audience has no escape, after all.

Edited November 23, 2008 by Wild Bill

[Smallc]

Unfortunately profit does contribute to the betterment of humankind. I suggest reading the Wealth of Nations.

No it doesn't, it contributes to someones profit book. Some time in the future, people will hopefully work for the betterment of all of us with no profit and no money whatsoever involved.

Edited November 24, 2008 by Smallc

[msj]

And yet another link on how deregulation has played a more important role in the current mess than any alleged (and rather flimsily defended) notion that the government coerced the banks to lend to poor people:

WaPo: Regulatory Failure at the Office of Thrift Supervision

[ReeferMadness]

A google on 'asteroid mining' gives many, many links. Here's one that's easy for the layman;

http://www.howstuffworks.com/asteroid-mining.htm

You're kidding me, right? This is the basis of your "Don't worry - be happy" posts? Aren't you missing a few things - like viable plans and resources? All I see are a bunch of sci-fi dreams.

It doesn't matter if you or I are up on this. It only matters to those prepared to make the money.

And where are all of these people who are going to pony up the trillions of dollars to make this work?

I've always wondered why the environmental movement not only refuses to embrace space development but actually seems quite negative towards it. After all, it would solve virtually all the problems environmentalists seem so worried about.

Hey, I think it's a fantastic idea. Tell you what - once you've gone up and mined the first ton of ore, we'll all have a parade for you. What's that? It won't happen in our lifetimes?

[blueblood]

Maybe technology will save us from ourselves again. Or maybe not. History repeats itself except when it doesn't. Meanwhile, we're throwing the dice on some future generation's lives.

With respect to Wild Bill, I don't see anyone mining asteroids nor has anyone claimed that what's on them will replace all of what we're currently suing up down here.

As mentioned previously, you need to learn what Socialism is before you try to criticize it.

Venezuela is a basket case from way back so I don't think it's a fair comparison. If you're claiming the average Albertan has a much better lifestyle than the average Norwegian, why don't you back that up with facts? In particular, maybe you could compare the lifestyle of low income Albertans vs. low income Norwegians.

The Community Reinvestment Act was enacted in 1977. Why did it take so long for it to cause problems? Read this link

Stop droning on about things you know little about and get yourself an education. The USSR was simply another way to achieve privilege for a few while the majority toiled away. Over time, people became aware of the big lie that it was all about socialism and the system withered away from within. Read Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

We'd really be throwing the dice wasting money on a problem that might not exist (global warming). Refer to Riverwinds rebuttals of the GW alarmist theory.

I know what socialism is, I also know how big of a joke it is. The USSR is the biggest failure in modern history, and what government policy did it have. I'll give you a hint, it starts with an S and ends in an ism.

Bullshit, Venezuela is fair game, they had a socialist gov't for ten years and access to a gold mine of oil. Why aren't they as rich as the world with alledgedly "the most advanced form of government there is?" I'll tell you, socialism sucks. By punishing all the foreign investment in that country they don't have enough funds to capitalize and fund projects. Who wants to invest in a country when their socialist government will ruin them? Because of socialism, the people of Venezuela suffer. On the other hand Ireland one of the most capitalist nations on the planet has come out of its basket case scenario of terrorism and squalor to become one of the richest nations in the world, and here's the kicker - they have no oil. By slashing their corporate tax rate and other unnecessary gov't bs, they encouraged investment and they are one of the richest countries in the world. My claim stands, socialism sucks.

If you think having a better lifestyle is due to more government services you need to give your head a shake. The average Albertan gets to keep more of their money than the average Norweigan. Also try telling me an average Norweigan drives a nicer vehicle and has a nicer house than an average Albertan. An average Norweigan could live like an average Albertan, but there are those darn sky high taxes that they have to pay. At least their gov't pumps out oil, because no private firm would be stupid enough to invest in an oppressive country like that.

I read the links, let me ask you a question, why would banks on their own lend to people who can't afford to pay back the loan with no questions asked when there are countless small business's that have to jump through hoops in order to get a small loan? Only gov't intervention can answer that question, once again socialism sucks. Had the banks not been forced to lend to poor people, we would not be in this mess.

The USSR was a socialist country, the cold war was a competition between capitalism and socialism, capitalism won and socialism sucks, get over it.

[blueblood]

Not force, but encourage there is a difference don't you think? By the way the neutrality of your source is in dispute, it says so right at the top of the page. No doubt it will be for a long long time.

So you're saying that Canada is more right-wing than the socialist US?

Man, this crisis is shaking right-wing confidence in things in ways that nobody ever could have imagined. I would suggest you right-wingers are far less psychologically prepared for what's happening than us lefties. No doubt you'll be trying to stuff us into labour camps before we try to stuff you into...Kumbiya camps or something.

My confidence is high. A lot higher than yours. I know this mess will be over in two years. I'm not worried in the least. I don't piss around in the stock market so I have nothing to worry about. Your the one who's running around yelling the sky is falling and cheering on an impending depression. Why would I need to force you to do labor, I have machines to do that.

[blueblood]

No it doesn't, it contributes to someones profit book. Some time in the future, people will hopefully work for the betterment of all of us with no profit and no money whatsoever involved.

No profit means no incentive which means everyone suffers, it's called human nature. The Russians tried to change human nature and failed miserably. People will always serve their own self interests and a lot of times other people benefit as a result of it. Everybody is out to make a profit and to better themselves, to think otherwise is naive and ridiculous.

[Wild Bill]

You're kidding me, right? This is the basis of your "Don't worry - be happy" posts? Aren't you missing a few things - like viable plans and resources? All I see are a bunch of sci-fi dreams.

And where are all of these people who are going to pony up the trillions of dollars to make this work?

Hey, I think it's a fantastic idea. Tell you what - once you've gone up and mined the first ton of ore, we'll all have a parade for you. What's that? It won't happen in our lifetimes?

No, I wasn't kidding. I just gave a link to a simple site 'cuz I thought it would be appropriate for you. If you do your own google you'll find many sites that have a lot more depth.

You could check out some of Mr. Branson's plans, the guy with Virgin Spaceways. You could check out the work being done on the space elevator idea.

As for it being done in our lifetimes, I can't say. How old are you? Certainly I would expect it in my daughters' lifetimes.

The world doesn't end when we do, you know!

You could also dig up a copy of G Harry Stine's book "The Space Enterprise". It's been around since the early 80's.

You're entitled to your opinions. I simply don't share them. As I said, there was a time when people insisted that I should buy stock in Timex and Royal Typewriter too! I worked with people who scoffed at me when I said that the Westinghouse branch we worked at was about to go out of business. It's now a parking lot. When the axe fell those people were blindsided. To me given the existing conditions and the trends it was patently obvious.

Somebody once said that "640k of RAM will be enough for anybody!" (Bill Gates)

If we wait long enough, we will see who's right.

I was going to make a crack about you still having an 8 track collection but then I realized, I'm a guy still running a huge collection of vinyl!

[Smallc]

No profit means no incentive which means everyone suffers, it's called human nature. The Russians tried to change human nature and failed miserably. People will always serve their own self interests and a lot of times other people benefit as a result of it. Everybody is out to make a profit and to better themselves, to think otherwise is naive and ridiculous.

And hopefully some day we'll get over that.

[msj]

I read the links, let me ask you a question, why would banks on their own lend to people who can't afford to pay back the loan with no questions asked when there are countless small business's that have to jump through hoops in order to get a small loan? Only gov't intervention can answer that question, once again socialism sucks. Had the banks not been forced to lend to poor people, we would not be in this mess.

Not sure what links you are referring.

If you mean the ones that I provided, well, anyone can "look" at the links.

It takes a different person to actually click on them and read them and, even more unlikely, understand them.

Do provide us with the proof that the same banks that were advertising and doling out NINJA loans (No Income, No Job, No Assets) were doing this because the government forced them to.

Of course, banks that partake in the CRA have every right to do bank examinations before lending money.

They didn't do these in recent years just like many other types of loans (the Alt-A shoe is dropping) because, at the time, it was more profitable to shovel the money to anyone who would take it because things go up forever, don't you know.

As usual, such short sightedness is coming home to roost.

[blueblood]

Not sure what links you are referring.

If you mean the ones that I provided, well, anyone can "look" at the links.

It takes a different person to actually click on them and read them and, even more unlikely, understand them.

Do provide us with the proof that the same banks that were advertising and doling out NINJA loans (No Income, No Job, No Assets) were doing this because the government forced them to.

Of course, banks that partake in the CRA have every right to do bank examinations before lending money.

They didn't do these in recent years just like many other types of loans (the Alt-A shoe is dropping) because, at the time, it was more profitable to shovel the money to anyone who would take it because things go up forever, don't you know.

As usual, such short sightedness is coming home to roost.

My links clearly stated that the government enacted legislation which forced banks to loan to poor people.

Why would anyone in their right mind loan money to someone who can't pay it off?

have you not applied for a loan before? They're a little hard to get when you have bugger all.

Here's an idea, watch dragon's den on cbc, hell watch all the episodes. And watch how they dole out the money if they do at all. Simple logic says it is more profitable to loan money out to people who can pay it back. Those Dragon's aren't stinking rich because they throw around money like you claim banks want to. Had gov't not got involved, the poor people would be living in low income housing where they belong.

[msj]

msj, you keep citing people who have predicted nine of the last four recessions so you and your links are less than helpful in understanding what will happen next. I disagree with your comparison to Japan in the early 1990s. Everything is now happening much faster.

Yes, there will be deflation but I think it will be shortlived unless we have an utter collpase in confidence and a serious liquidity trap.

Ah yes, the same old ad hominem attacks from August boy.

When you can't counter an argument then make up crap about the source.

[eyeball]

Had gov't not got involved, the poor people would be living in low income housing where they belong.

Okay. So this global recession is not the fault of poor people after all, its the government's fault for forcing them out of low income housing.

[msj]

My links clearly stated that the government enacted legislation which forced banks to loan to poor people.

Why would anyone in their right mind loan money to someone who can't pay it off?

Your links did not do anything of the sort. What do you not understand about a bank still having the right to make proper examinations?

As to why a bank would lend money to someone who can't pay it off - simple really. You set up a system that does something like this:

1) Have a Federal Reserve cut interest rates to historic lows and turn a blind eye to regulation of financial markets (same with Congress).

2) Have a mortgage broker go out and push mortgages (or re-fi's) onto people. The MB only has to ensure that the people make payments for 90 days and he gets to walk away.

3) The bank that lends the money in the first place also gets to walk away because it wraps up the above mortgage for hundreds of other mortgages and then sell these as higher yielding investments than government bonds. And, doncha know, their risk is hardly worse than government bonds.

4) Have a housing bubble pop and/or mortgages that reset at higher payment and higher interest rates. Watch as the house of cards tumbles down to the turn of trillions of dollars of bailouts in the US alone.

Maybe if the MBA crowd didn't drink so much of their own kool-aid we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.

[msj]

I read several of your links but to me, the best counter argument is the collapse of housing bubbles in Spain and the UK. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac didn't guarantee mortgages there.

This is just it, we don't know what regulations are, or are not, in place in Spain or the UK or anywhere else where loose money has helped to wreak havoc.

At least with the US we can discuss a country that we are familiar with and for which open access to their laws, rules, and regulations allow us to easily consider just what went wrong.

Which is why I don't spend much time commenting on Spain or UK - when I don't know the situation well enough, and I am unable to provide links with substance to back up my opinions, then I keep my hands off the keyboards.

If only others could do the same.

[ReeferMadness]

No, I wasn't kidding. I just gave a link to a simple site 'cuz I thought it would be appropriate for you. If you do your own google you'll find many sites that have a lot more depth.

Gee, thanks. I appreciate you not confusing me with too much technical detail. To return the favour, here's a link to a documentary film that proves that we don't have to worry how bad we mess up this planet. Just jump on a giant spaceship and let robots do everything for us. I can see now why you have no fear that your actions might wreck the planet for your daughter.

Given your obvious mastery of the topic, I'm a bit surprised you didn't post this link yourself!

[blueblood]

Your links did not do anything of the sort. What do you not understand about a bank still having the right to make proper examinations?

As to why a bank would lend money to someone who can't pay it off - simple really. You set up a system that does something like this:

1) Have a Federal Reserve cut interest rates to historic lows and turn a blind eye to regulation of financial markets (same with Congress).

2) Have a mortgage broker go out and push mortgages (or re-fi's) onto people. The MB only has to ensure that the people make payments for 90 days and he gets to walk away.

3) The bank that lends the money in the first place also gets to walk away because it wraps up the above mortgage for hundreds of other mortgages and then sell these as higher yielding investments than government bonds. And, doncha know, their risk is hardly worse than government bonds.

4) Have a housing bubble pop and/or mortgages that reset at higher payment and higher interest rates. Watch as the house of cards tumbles down to the turn of trillions of dollars of bailouts in the US alone.

Maybe if the MBA crowd didn't drink so much of their own kool-aid we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.

If that was true, then the dragons would be throwing money at every ridiculous pitch that comes their way, banks would loan to everyone no questions asked. Since banks do not in fact like loaning to people, due to the large amounts of loan rejections, we must ask ourselves why would banks loan to skids in the first place? The answer, government trying to impose socialist nonsense by forcing banks to "give" money to skids. It's simple logic.

If the mortgage thing was the way to go, Kevin O'Leary, Brett Wilson, and the rest of them would be all about loaning money to skids. If it's such a money maker, why aren't these guys in it? They are all about making money aren't they?

[ReeferMadness]

You might as well give up, msj. Blueblood is a true believer. Logic and facts can't penetrate blind faith.

[Wild Bill]

Gee, thanks. I appreciate you not confusing me with too much technical detail. To return the favour, here's a link to a documentary film that proves that we don't have to worry how bad we mess up this planet. Just jump on a giant spaceship and let robots do everything for us. I can see now why you have no fear that your actions might wreck the planet for your daughter.

Given your obvious mastery of the topic, I'm a bit surprised you didn't post this link yourself!

My actions? How do you know what I do? Have you been following me? :angry:

Well, if that's the sort of technical documentary you're comfortable with I won't even try to compete. Ad hominem, ad hominem. Shades of Rabble.

Still, it adds to my point about how the environmentalists hate the idea of space development. Since technically it very well WOULD save the planet there must be a deeper reason! I'm going to ponder that one for a bit and then start a new thread. I've learned that apparent contradictions are often explained by premises and goals that actually are different than those officially stated.