We're in a Recession Because ...

[darkangel]

You mean that you're not a Liberal?!?!?!? :24:

 

[retro]

You mean that you're not a Liberal?!?!?!? :24:

I know I'm shocked... I thought he was as left as they come

 

[edgray]

But it wasn't the basis that caused the problem. If it was, it wouldn't be the basis at all. The problems were caused by human intervention trying to play the system & gain unfair advantage.

If the top 1% are raking in 25% of the salaries, there simply isn't enough money at the bottom to keep society functioning properly. When money goes to the top, it stays there. They're not spending money in the rest of society, they have their own shops to shop in.

Take where I live, for example. A massive gap between the rich and poor here. Since being in recession, do you think the services and shops the rich use have gone out of business? Of course not, it's the shops the rest of us use that are going under because the rich are hoarding the money, spending it in places owned by other rich people, and leaving us without enough money to keep the shops and services we need running.

It's not worth its own thread and would be pointless to tell people who don't read these threads:

I've just been called a Liberal! :24::24: Is that a classic or what?? :24::24:

That is a classic! And definitely worth it's own thread, I'd say! What were the circumstances?

 

[Accountable]

That is a classic! And definitely worth it's own thread, I'd say! What were the circumstances?

I disagreed with a guy that said it was the classic libertarian stance that the gov't should be able to disallow homosexuals from serving in the military, because it's their right to discriminate and libertarians support freedom. :willy_nilly:

 

[Accountable]

But it wasn't the basis that caused the problem. If it was, it wouldn't be the basis at all. The problems were caused by human intervention trying to play the system & gain unfair advantage.

If the top 1% are raking in 25% of the salaries, there simply isn't enough money at the bottom to keep society functioning properly. When money goes to the top, it stays there. They're not spending money in the rest of society, they have their own shops to shop in.

That's a result of us allowing manipulation of the markets, not the normal result of capitalism.

Take where I live, for example. A massive gap between the rich and poor here. Since being in recession, do you think the services and shops the rich use have gone out of business? Of course not, it's the shops the rest of us use that are going under because the rich are hoarding the money, spending it in places owned by other rich people, and leaving us without enough money to keep the shops and services we need running.

You're trying to claim that Spain is a bastion of free market capitalism?? :eek

 

[edgray]

I disagreed with a guy that said it was the classic libertarian stance that the gov't should be able to disallow homosexuals from serving in the military, because it's their right to discriminate and libertarians support freedom. :willy_nilly:

you work-shy liberal you!

 

[edgray]

That's a result of us allowing manipulation of the markets, not the normal result of capitalism.

You're trying to claim that Spain is a bastion of free market capitalism?? :eek

lol no not at all. But where I live is - Andalucia, an autonomous community, certainly is. Down here in Marbella, there's no workers rights, the rich dictate pretty much everything, the govt we do have do very little to change the situation. Down here everything is in black money, pretty much as free as you can get.

 

[retro]

Recession worse than originally thought... 2.6% loss rather than the 2.4% loss originally thought

I thought those stimulous were supposed to jumpstart the economy, lower unemployment, and get more people back into the workforce.

 

[edgray]

Recession worse than originally thought... 2.6% loss rather than the 2.4% loss originally thought

I thought those stimulous were supposed to jumpstart the economy, lower unemployment, and get more people back into the workforce.

It's way too early to see any signs of recovery after such a downturn. It can take a few years to climb out of a recession. It's likely the stimulus package has helped the recession not get any worse at least. Obama was very overly optimistic about what he could do in such economic dire straits.

 

[Accountable]

From what I've heard, poorer countries are already showing signs of recovery because their gov't ran out of their "fuck up the economy" fund.

 

[Minor Axis]

One of the biggest problems is that you guys, you know who you are, want to blame the government 100% and give big business and the money brokers a free pass. It's not a balanced view.

 

[Accountable]

One of the biggest problems is that you guys, you know who you are, want to blame the government 100% and give big business and the money brokers a free pass. It's not a balanced view.

When the gov't sets up the laws and business follows the law, yes I blame the gov't. You seem to want business to show restraint in the face of gov't encouraging them - damn near ordering them - to do what they were created to do.

 

[Minor Axis]

When the gov't sets up the laws and business follows the law, yes I blame the gov't. You seem to want business to show restraint in the face of gov't encouraging them - damn near ordering them - to do what they were created to do.

Most of the conservative arguments here are anti-rules and regulations because of the perception that it costs business money. Here is an analogy (maybe not the best), but it's like police and criminals. You are holding the police responsible while not saying anything bad about the criminals, and really you don't want the police interfering with day to day criminal activities anyway. I'm not calling corporations criminals although they are lacking in morals these days. Wall street is clearly out of control. It's participants do not act morally. The excesses are legendary. They need controls.

Now government is clearly imperfect, but it is all we have. I do not subscribe to anarchy or unregulated capitalism.

 

[Accountable]

Most of the conservative arguments here are anti-rules and regulations because of the perception that it costs business money. Here is an analogy (maybe not the best), but it's like police and criminals. You are holding the police responsible while not saying anything bad about the criminals, and really you don't want the police interfering with day to day criminal activities anyway. I'm not calling corporations criminals although they are lacking in morals these days. Wall street is clearly out of control. It's participants do not act morally. The excesses are legendary. They need controls.

Now government is clearly imperfect, but it is all we have. I do not subscribe to anarchy or unregulated capitalism.

You're right. That's an absolutely horrid analogy. Why? The police really are the government, but the businessmen that follow the laws laid out for them are not criminals. Maybe they should be, but to call them that the politicians need to do their job and not pave the way & incentivize them to do what they've done. Corporations are not immoral; they are amoral, and Washington encourages the amorality by shielding the owners and executives from responsibility, accountability, or negative consequence.

Wall street is in control. That's the problem. Through some deal with Satan, corporations and other organizations are recognized as individuals and granted rights of citizens without the responsibility. They budget the cost of purchasing politicians and lobbying Congress into their operating liabilities. That also I lay at the feet of the politicians. They encourage such behavior when they are supposed to be the ones that block it.

 

[edgray]

From what I've heard, poorer countries are already showing signs of recovery because their gov't ran out of their "fuck up the economy" fund.

:24:

I think countries like Spain are showing signs of recovery because they are more self-sufficient than countries like the UK and US.

 

[edgray]

Wall street is in control.

:24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24:
:24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24: :24:

that just made my day

 

[Accountable]

In control is not under control.

 

[edgray]

In control is not under control.

Wall Street is neither in control nor under control. they are a bunch of money grabbing parasites that suck the life out of society and do so with minimal regulation (regulation that generally favours what they want to do anyway). It's a free-for-all, where a few get to gamble with societies future.

 

[Francis]

Global GDP Numbers show a trend upwards and stable.. The ripple effect will take time to trickle down and won't happen overnight ?

The collapse took almost a year to happen in a Domino effect.. North America is looking good compared to other countries and we feel it in business.

The only thing business are not seeing is the big spike we saw prior to the collapse and honestly many of us don't want it.. What seems to good to be true usually is..

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/update/02/index.htm

 

[Accountable]

Wall Street is neither in control nor under control. they are a bunch of money grabbing parasites that suck the life out of society and do so with minimal regulation (regulation that generally favours what they want to do anyway). It's a free-for-all, where a few get to gamble with societies future.

They're not in control? They haven't purchased Washington politicians lock, stock, and barrel? If all regulation were taken away, most large corporations would fail and collapse.