Credit Card debt hits record high $4 Trillion - household net worth hits record low - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Bladewire · 03-11-2019, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

The reason membership site rebilling fell off a cliff in 2008 was all the banks being induced by leverage regulation to turn off tons of credit cards of perfectly good payers, just so the banks could get their bailouts and continued mortgage guarantees.

The increase in debt now is what economic recovery looks like for Main Street and the middle class in America.

Different financial analysts have very different views of ideal markers because different groups either do or do not wish to expand the prosperity of the middle class.

A college-educated employed homeowner, driving past a homeless encampment, in a late model car, will have a debt-heavy much lower net worth than the folks living in tents, under an overpass, but which of those options should be our goal in America?

I remember rebilling falling off because credit cards were maxed out.

All the analysts I've seen on CNBC , Fox, etc say the recession is coming, likely this year.

When they say the recession is coming they point to the red flags that I've been making threads about.

When you combine the red flags I've listed with facts about the consumer economic situation ( like 58% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings, 37% have no savings and live paycheck to paycheck, the average credit card balance for those who don't pay their credit card balance off every month is $5,700 ) then it's clear that the economists are right we're teatering on the edge.

Remember, retail sales in December were the lowest since the financial crisis 9 years ago.

If people with disposable income weren't feeling the pinch they would be spending it at Christmas and the market would be meeting forecast not plunging below expectations.

Retail sales sink 1.2% in December in the worst plunge in nine years

Bladewire · 03-11-2019, 04:26 PM

Here is the fed chairman Jerome Powell talking about the economy slowing, and some of the red flags I've been posting about the last few months, on 60 minutes last Sunday. Keep in mind that it's his job not to scare anyone about where the US economy is headed.

AmeliaG · 03-11-2019, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

I remember rebilling falling off because credit cards were maxed out.

All the analysts I've seen on CNBC , Fox, etc say the recession is coming, likely this year.

When they say the recession is coming they point to the red flags that I've been making threads about.

When you combine the red flags I've listed with facts about the consumer economic situation ( like 58% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings, 37% have no savings and live paycheck to paycheck, the average credit card balance for those who don't pay their credit card balance off every month is $5,700 ) then it's clear that the economists are right we're teatering on the edge.

Remember, retail sales in December were the lowest since the financial crisis 9 years ago.

If people with disposable income weren't feeling the pinch they would be spending it at Christmas and the market would be meeting forecast not plunging below expectations.

Retail sales sink 1.2% in December in the worst plunge in nine years

Credit cards were not maxed out.

Credit cards were canceled by the millions by the banks because reducing leverage was a requirement of the bailout. Banks hired temp staff to deal with the massive number of freaked out consumers phoning to find out why their Xmas present was losing their never late credit card, at the same time the banks received billions of taxpayer dollars.

Didn't you hear from your members about this or experience it or know people who experiencedit, even if you didn't follow the financial news?

Bladewire · 03-11-2019, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

Credit cards were not maxed out.

Credit cards were canceled by the millions by the banks because reducing leverage was a requirement of the bailout. Banks hired temp staff to deal with the massive number of freaked out consumers phoning to find out why their Xmas present was losing their never late credit card, at the same time the banks received billions of taxpayer dollars.

Didn't you hear from your members about this or experience it or know people who experiencedit, even if you didn't follow the financial news?

I remember people with credit cards they didn't use, with high credit limits, were cancelled.

I Googled the topic for about 20 minutes and couldn't find anything to post here either way.

Common sense tells us that during hard financial times credit cards will be maxed out right?

Regardless, all the red flags from 2008 are here again, including Christmas retails sales crashing to 2008 levels.

I remember during the 2007 financial crisis Oprah was the only one who is saying that there's a problem and she would have shows about not being ashamed at the debt and how to live more economically while the finance shows & articles were saying everything was fine, until it couldn't be hidden anymore, which is natural. we want our economy to keep going as strongly as possible for as long as possible and minimize red flags.

OH! One reason we might not be connecting on this issue, I was living in Australia at that time and I had been living in Australia for five years without coming back to America.

I think our disconnect possibly might be the news sources and information we had and what the focus was in the different countries at that time?

thommy · 03-11-2019, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

The reason membership site rebilling fell off a cliff in 2008 was all the banks being induced by leverage regulation to turn off tons of credit cards of perfectly good payers, just so the banks could get their bailouts and continued mortgage guarantees.

The increase in debt now is what economic recovery looks like for Main Street and the middle class in America.

Different financial analysts have very different views of ideal markers because different groups either do or do not wish to expand the prosperity of the middle class.

A college-educated employed homeowner, driving past a homeless encampment, in a late model car, will have a debt-heavy much lower net worth than the folks living in tents, under an overpass, but which of those options should be our goal in America?

you can help an unhealthy economy for a short while with cheap interest and more credit - that is a fact and it was done to get out of the crisis.

BUT - it have a high price later on.

no matter if one lives under a bridge or in wonderland castle - everyone have limits and sooner or later they are reached.

than is the time to pay back. and not only pay back the money also the interest on top.

these repayments reduce the PREVIOUS existing purchase budget and do not flow into the market until the debt has been repaid (what can be years or decades)

when tens of millions do that, the domestic economy lacks demand.

first the rate of inflation falls.
then inflation turns into deflation.

and a deflation costs a lot of jobs because deflation is a sign of a lack of demand and therefore leads to a reduction of production.
for less production, fewer workers are needed.

the open secret of every economy is to maintain balance.
either trump never learned that or he ignores it because he knows that this effect can last long enough to catch his successor. the stupid people won't blame him then - just like they don't blame obama for the trend, what was just continued by trump for a while, in an exaggerated way, and completely shifted the balance in a boom phase.

this bill will not only be expensive - I fear it will become unaffordable.

AmeliaG · 03-11-2019, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thommy

you can help an unhealthy economy for a short while with cheap interest and more credit - that is a fact and it was done to get out of the crisis.

BUT - it have a high price later on.

no matter if one lives under a bridge or in wonderland castle - everyone have limits and sooner or later they are reached.

than is the time to pay back. and not only pay back the money also the interest on top.

these repayments reduce the PREVIOUS existing purchase budget and do not flow into the market until the debt has been repaid (what can be years or decades)

when tens of millions do that, the domestic economy lacks demand.

first the rate of inflation falls.
then inflation turns into deflation.

and a deflation costs a lot of jobs because deflation is a sign of a lack of demand and therefore leads to a reduction of production.
for less production, fewer workers are needed.

the open secret of every economy is to maintain balance.
either trump never learned that or he ignores it because he knows that this effect can last long enough to catch his successor. the stupid people won't blame him then - just like they don't blame obama for the trend, what was just continued by trump for a while, in an exaggerated way, and completely shifted the balance in a boom phase.

this bill will not only be expensive - I fear it will become unaffordable.

Both Republicans and Democrats were in the rooms where the bank bailout decisions were made, so the basics shouldn't be something where people get all crazy partisan about it.

Access to capital was cut extremely deeply at the time of the bank bailout -- the beginning of the economic pain felt all over America. This was because the terms of the bailout required this of the banks.

Big banks got TARP money, while small family banks, more likely to know their customers, were left to fold.

People could no longer get mortgages, credit cards were turned off, home equity lines of credit were turned off, business lines of credit were cut, etc.

Then (and partisan blame is more reasonable here) Operation Choke Point was put into effect, which even more greatly reduced access to capital across a number of industries, both directly through bank denials and indirectly through efforts against payday loans, shadow banks, and crowdfunding. The Trump administration canceled Operation Choke Point, most likely more out of sympathy for the firearms industry than for adult or crowdfunded artists, but they did cancel it.

jscott · 03-11-2019, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thommy

no matter if one lives under a bridge or in wonderland castle - everyone have limits and sooner or later they are reached.

than is the time to pay back. and not only pay back the money also the interest on top.

these repayments reduce the PREVIOUS existing purchase budget and do not flow into the market until the debt has been repaid (what can be years or decades)

Can you please tell us where & when is USA gov max limit?

pimpmaster9000 · 03-12-2019, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jscott

Can you please tell us where & when is USA gov max limit?

you WILL have to pay back the debt...make no mistake about this...paying the debt back will cost you dearly in terms of progress...not paying the debt back will also cost you dearly...there is no scenario where you do not pay the debt back in some form...being american does not excuse you from basic common sense: the debt always comes due...always...

jscott · 03-12-2019, 02:03 AM

everyone in America lives beyond their means, at every level, at unhealthy levels, at UNFAIR levels. It would only be fair, that USA would eventually need to pay back the debts. Per person, and at every scale.

Paul Markham · 03-12-2019, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

Yet again Paul shows his ignorance about America, the country he obsesses on daily from halfway around the world in a foreign country he's an immigrant to from Britain.

I'm staggered that paying your CC off every month, having a good wage and savings are less important than CC debt when applying for a loan.

Paul Markham · 03-12-2019, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

I remember rebilling falling off because credit cards were maxed out.

Don't worry they can apply for another loan and fall further into debt. What's the level of declared bankruptcies in the US?

Paul Markham · 03-12-2019, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jscott

everyone in America lives beyond their means, at every level, at unhealthy levels, at UNFAIR levels. It would only be fair, that USA would eventually need to pay back the debts. Per person, and at every scale.

^^^^^

thommy · 03-12-2019, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jscott

Can you please tell us where & when is USA gov max limit?

this is indeed a good question as it depends from WHERE the money comes.

Japan is a very good example for that as nobody would ever assume that a country can have 236 % dept to GDP and still exist.

In japan, however, the case is different.
1. national debt in % of GDP has been declining since 2013 (in 2013 the ratio was still 243%).
2. the debt japan have is owed to around 20% to foreign nations and investors 80% of this credits cam FROM inside japan.
so even if japan would crash the most money what would get lost is their own money.

now compare that to the US. 19,5 trillion of the 22 trillion of US debt is owed to foreign countries or investors.

in compare to japan, where the debt is on the way down, the US broke all records under the trump administration. he lend money from outside (mainly from China) to fire up an already WORKING economy and produced even more interest burdon for the US household. in the same time he LOWERED the tax and reduced the government income that have now to pay with this lower income a higher ammount of interest.

one of trumps big plans have been to REDUCE US dept within a few years to zero.
all he have completed yet is that he increased this debt like not one president before him.
not in cash and not even in % there was ever a president with such a negative balance.

what he thought is a 100 years old theory that have never worked before (and it was tried a huge number of times). he thought that he can blow up the economy with borrowed money and this "wealthy effect" will continue.

this is not the case as we see. us economy is cooling down rapidly.
just look at one of the most (if not THE most) important indicators the REDBOOK INDEX. here you see how his childish cardhouse is falling.

here you can already see very well the effect that every normally educated human could have READ BEFORE if he had simply informed himself about the stupidity.
because just like trump´s results now look, you can already calculate that in advance in the refutation of the so-called laffer theory.
already reagan had to learn that - only he learned faster - which nevertheless secured him a place as an economist donkey in the universities of economics, because there the laffer curve is called "Reagonomics" today.

So Trump doesn't even have a chance to put his name on his economic freak because Reagan occupied the place decades ago.

AmeliaG · 03-12-2019, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thommy

this is indeed a good question as it depends from WHERE the money comes.

Japan is a very good example for that as nobody would ever assume that a country can have 236 % dept to GDP and still exist.

In japan, however, the case is different.
1. national debt in % of GDP has been declining since 2013 (in 2013 the ratio was still 243%).
2. the debt japan have is owed to around 20% to foreign nations and investors 80% of this credits cam FROM inside japan.
so even if japan would crash the most money what would get lost is their own money.

now compare that to the US. 19,5 trillion of the 22 trillion of US debt is owed to foreign countries or investors.

in compare to japan, where the debt is on the way down, the US broke all records under the trump administration. he lend money from outside (mainly from China) to fire up an already WORKING economy and produced even more interest burdon for the US household. in the same time he LOWERED the tax and reduced the government income that have now to pay with this lower income a higher ammount of interest.

one of trumps big plans have been to REDUCE US dept within a few years to zero.
all he have completed yet is that he increased this debt like not one president before him.
not in cash and not even in % there was ever a president with such a negative balance.

what he thought is a 100 years old theory that have never worked before (and it was tried a huge number of times). he thought that he can blow up the economy with borrowed money and this "wealthy effect" will continue.

this is not the case as we see. us economy is cooling down rapidly.
just look at one of the most (if not THE most) important indicators the REDBOOK INDEX. here you see how his childish cardhouse is falling.

here you can already see very well the effect that every normally educated human could have READ BEFORE if he had simply informed himself about the stupidity.
because just like trump´s results now look, you can already calculate that in advance in the refutation of the so-called laffer theory.
already reagan had to learn that - only he learned faster - which nevertheless secured him a place as an economist donkey in the universities of economics, because there the laffer curve is called "Reagonomics" today.

So Trump doesn't even have a chance to put his name on his economic freak because Reagan occupied the place decades ago.

Do you not understand the wide regulatory shifts in access to capital from the past decade?

Government debt is separate. Intuitively, I feel like it could be bad, but, other than Bill Clinton's administration (which also enabled the supposed housing crisis by deregulating banks, same as Reagan with the S&L on a smaller scale) when has a modern era US administration gone the austerity route and, really, why should they? What nation state has the power to cut up the USA's credit card?

thommy · 03-12-2019, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

Do you not understand the wide regulatory shifts in access to capital from the past decade?

I think I know quite a lot about this things.

Quote:

Government debt is separate.

Of course, the national debt has to be seen separately from the private debt, but it is exactly this private debt that ultimately leads to the state earning less and less because less and less is spent on consumption, which, as we know, is followed by production.

Quote:

Intuitively, I feel like it could be bad, but, other than Bill Clinton's administration (which also enabled the supposed housing crisis by deregulating banks, same as Reagan with the S&L on a smaller scale)

I think Clinton knew that too. But unfortunately american politics is made from lobbies and the democratic system is a pure pharse.
I don´t know why anybody can think that this system is worth a penny. There are better forms of democracy in 3rd world countries.

Quote:

when has a modern era US administration gone the austerity route and, really, why should they?

they simply can not because it is impossible to become the POTUS by telling the truth.
americans WANT to hear this lies of power glamour and prosperity.
I don´t know if they are simply stupid or give a fuck on the next generation.

Quote:

What nation state has the power to cut up the USA's credit card?

It has not much to do with power as with the fact, that nobody will lend money or invest in a dead horse.

this is why actually all economists in the fucking world thinking how to replace the US in the world´s economy. and it is already going on - the US was the no. one economy in the world and is now the number 3.
and nobody on this planet cries if it will be number 20 or 50 because it will be ANOTHER number 3 what is more reliable and trustworthy.

this money that was lend to the US for help the US to CONSUME AND IMPORT from others will go somewhere else. it is that simple and all indicators around proves it.

the real base of the american buying power are not the citizens not the military and not the government. these are the big multinational companies. and if the have to chose between losing the US market or the world market - guess what they will do.

what some obviously don't understand is the fact that the world needs america, but only in part. on the other hand, america's success is 100% dependent on the world. a world that since trump more and more turns away from america.

Acepimp · 03-12-2019, 03:20 PM

Facts Are Facts=> Obama Owns Worst Economic Numbers in 80 Years, Since 1932

Thanks to Obamanomics the US economy is plodding through the worst recovery in decades.
The Wall Street Journal reported:

Quote:

The economic expansion—already the worst on record since World War II—is weaker than previously thought, according to newly revised data.

From 2012 through 2014, the economy grew at an all-too-familiar rate of 2% annually, according to three years of revised figures the Commerce Department released Thursday. That’s a 0.3 percentage point downgrade from prior estimates.

The revisions were released concurrently with the government’s first estimate of second-quarter output.

Since the recession ended in June 2009, the economy has advanced at a 2.2% annual pace through the end of last year. That’s more than a half-percentage point worse than the next-weakest expansion of the past 70 years, the one from 2001 through 2007. While there have been highs and lows in individual quarters, overall the economy has failed to break out of its roughly 2% pattern for six years.

It’s even worse than we thought.
Obama looks even worse, ranking dead last among all presidents since 1932 – over 80 years.
The Daily Caller reported:

Quote:

Over the first five years of Obama’s presidency, the U.S. economy grew more slowly than during any five-year period since just after the end of World War II, averaging less than 1.3 percent per year. If we leave out the sharp recession of 1945-46 following World War II, Obama looks even worse, ranking dead last among all presidents since 1932. No other president since the Great Depression has presided over such a steadily poor rate of economic growth during his first five years in office. This slow growth should not be a surprise in light of the policies this administration has pursued.

An economy usually grows rapidly in the years immediately following a recession. As Peter Ferrera points out in Forbes, the U.S. economy has not even reached its long run average rate of growth of 3.3 percent; the highest annual growth rate since Obama took office was 2.8 percent. Total growth in real GDP over the 19 quarters of economic recovery since the second quarter of 2009 has been 10.2 percent. Growth over the same length of time during previous post-World War II recoveries has ranged from 15.1 percent during George W. Bush’s presidency to 30 percent during the recovery that began when John F. Kennedy was elected.

Bladewire · 03-12-2019, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

Government debt is separate. Intuitively, I feel like it could be bad, but, other than Bill Clinton's administration (which also enabled the supposed housing crisis by deregulating banks, same as Reagan with the S&L on a smaller scale) when has a modern era US administration gone the austerity route and, really, why should they? What nation state has the power to cut up the USA's credit card?

Aaaahhh blaming Bill Clinton for Bushes housing crisis that's a Republican move.

Acepimp · 03-12-2019, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

Aaaahhh blaming Bill Clinton for Bushes housing crisis that's a Republican move.

It's absolutely true what Amelia said about Clinton deregulating banks. You act like democrats can do no wrong. That's simply false.

AmeliaG · 03-12-2019, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

Aaaahhh blaming Bill Clinton for Bushes housing crisis that's a Republican move.

I said both the Clinton and Reagan administrations were involved in deregulation of banks which lead to apparent crises. You can have opinions on whether the results were crises or how bad, but what they did is simple fact.

How is stating facts about administrations from both parties partisan, much less Republican?

Are you claiming Reagan's administration did not engage in deregulation?

Bladewire · 03-12-2019, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

I said both the Clinton and Reagan administrations were involved in deregulation of banks which lead to apparent crises. You can have opinions on whether the results were crises or how bad, but what they did is simple fact.

How is stating facts about administrations from both parties partisan, much less Republican?

Are you claiming Reagan's administration did not engage in deregulation?

I apologise. My mistake I didn't see Reagan there. Good job

I was too young to know what's going on during the Reagan & Clinton years. I focus on who's doing what now, and the last few years. I was out of country from 2002 to 2007 so there's a bit of a gap there. I never really focused on America when I left, I wanted to get away from the constant propaganda here and Australia did the trick. I only came back so my son would have a high school education in America play American football in having the American high School experience. Big mistake. We should have stayed in Australia.

MaDalton · 03-12-2019, 04:26 PM

Clinton signed the deregulation of the Glass–Steagall Act into law in 1999

Quote:

After the financial crisis of 2007–2008, some commentators argued that the repeal of Sections 20 and 32 had played an important role in leading to the housing bubble and financial crisis. Economics Nobel prize laureate Joseph Stiglitz, for instance, argued that "[w]hen repeal of Glass-Steagall brought investment and commercial banks together, the investment-bank culture came out on top", and banks which had previously been managed conservatively turned to riskier investments to increase their returns.[11] Another laureate, Paul Krugman, contended that the repealing of the act "was indeed a mistake"; however, it was not the cause of the financial crisis.[24]

Other commentators believed that these banking changes had no effect, and the financial crisis would have happened the same way if the regulations had still been in force.[25] Lawrence J. White, for instance, noted that "it was not [commercial banks'] investment banking activities, such as underwriting and dealing in securities, that did them in".[26]

At the time of the repeal, most commentators believed it would be harmless. Because the Federal Reserve's interpretations of the act had already weakened restrictions previously in place, commentators did not find much significance in the repeal, especially of sections 20 and 32.[14] Instead, the five year anniversary of its repeal was marked by numerous sources explaining that the GLBA had not significantly changed the market structure of the banking and securities industries. More significant changes had occurred during the 1990s when commercial banking firms had gained a significant role in securities markets through "Section 20 affiliates".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%...ll_legislation

Fact is though in regards to the current situation: there are times when taking on debt makes sense (as it did in 2008 - we can still debate whether companies like GM should have died instead) and there are times when paying back debt makes sense (as it would now in times of prosperity).

Fact is also that with current budget projection, Trump will have raised the national debt by 50% until 2025. After promising he will eliminate debt completely in 8 years.

Once again - a raise of the total debt of the US by 50% between now and 2025

And I really have a hard time understanding how his followers so aggressively defend that. Considering it's the party that always called out the Democrats for raising the debt (which is not even true as a generalization).

Bladewire · 03-12-2019, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StefanG

Clinton signed the deregulation of the Glass–Steagall Act into law in 1999

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%...ll_legislation

Fact is though in regards to the current situation: there are times when taking on debt makes sense (as it did in 2008 - we can still debate whether companies like GM should have died instead) and there are times when paying back debt makes sense (as it would now in times of prosperity).

Fact is also that with current budget projection, Trump will have raised the national debt by 50% until 2025. After promising he will eliminate debt completely in 8 years.

And I really have a hard time understanding how his followers so aggressively defend that. Considering it's the party that always called out the Democrats for raising the debt (which is not even true as a generalization).

Trump has just removed the banking registrations put in place after the financial collapse.

I made a thread about it.

We're reaching all these red flags of the last financial crisis and Trump decides to remove the banking regulations that were put in place to protect us from another financial crisis.

I can't find the thread but here are a couple articles

Regulators Move to Ease Crisis-Era Levers Over Financial Firms | Wall Street Journal

Trump's Push to Ease Wall Street Rules Hindered by Missteps | Bloomberg

pimpmaster9000 · 03-12-2019, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

I apologise. My mistake I didn't see Reagan there. Good job

I was too young to know what's going on during the Reagan & Clinton years. I focus on who's doing what now, and the last few years. I was out of country from 2002 to 2007 so there's a bit of a gap there. I never really focused on America when I left, I wanted to get away from the constant propaganda here and Australia did the trick. I only came back so my son would have a high school education in America play American football in having the American high School experience. Big mistake. We should have stayed in Australia.

Oh man american high school blows...

Bladewire · 03-12-2019, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crucifissio

Oh man american high school blows...

Naw it's awesome. My kid was on the football team, there's cheerleaders camaraderie assemblies all that cool stuff.

in Australia he was just on the footy team no cheerleaders nothing

I'm mistaken coming back to America is the quality of life here isn't as good as it is in Australia for the same amount of work. My kid would have had a much better quality of life in Australia and would probably have his first home by now. most of his friends from high school and Australia have already bought their first home or their first rental property.

thommy · 03-13-2019, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acepimp

It's absolutely true what Amelia said about Clinton deregulating banks. You act like democrats can do no wrong. That's simply false.

so if you think that deregulating banks is the wrong thing, why a fuck do you think it is good when trump does it?

Clinton´s deregulation was just a start of a disaster but the real final step to the crash was made by Bush in 2004 when he allowed investment banks to finance unlimited loans on credit. and THIS is where the countdown started.

if you would know that much about economy and history as you want to tell us you should see and understand that trump leads america into bankruptcy.
because this is the only thing he can proudly say that he have the best skills.

AmeliaG · 03-13-2019, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

Trump has just removed the banking registrations put in place after the financial collapse.

I made a thread about it.

We're reaching all these red flags of the last financial crisis and Trump decides to remove the banking regulations that were put in place to protect us from another financial crisis.

I can't find the thread but here are a couple articles

Regulators Move to Ease Crisis-Era Levers Over Financial Firms | Wall Street Journal

Trump's Push to Ease Wall Street Rules Hindered by Missteps | Bloomberg

Which of the regulations the Trump administration removed do you think should have remained? Presumably you are not a fan of Choke Point?

AmeliaG · 03-13-2019, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thommy

so if you think that deregulating banks is the wrong thing, why a fuck do you think it is good when trump does it?

Clinton´s deregulation was just a start of a disaster but the real final step to the crash was made by Bush in 2004 when he allowed investment banks to finance unlimited loans on credit. and THIS is where the countdown started.

if you would know that much about economy and history as you want to tell us you should see and understand that trump leads america into bankruptcy.
because this is the only thing he can proudly say that he have the best skills.

The start of the disaster was when the bankers, who had made fabulous profits from deregulation, wanted to socialize their losses.

If I make a bad business decision, I suffer the loss. There is no reason why one percenters should not be subject to the same laws of the market, if they want deregulation.

Bladewire · 03-13-2019, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

Which of the regulations the Trump administration removed do you think should have remained? Presumably you are not a fan of Choke Point?

I made a detailed post about this exact topic before I'll look for it and repost.

Recently, after the annual economic stress tests for the top banks, 4 banks showed some negative results, one with major red flags. Shortly after the Trump administration rolled back mandatory testing.

I'm a conservative Progressive Capitalist. I'm all for cheap money and growth etc I'm just not down for another financial collapse. The auto finance industry seems to be our next bubble.

thommy · 03-13-2019, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

The start of the disaster was when the bankers, who had made fabulous profits from deregulation, wanted to socialize their losses.

If I make a bad business decision, I suffer the loss. There is no reason why one percenters should not be subject to the same laws of the market, if they want deregulation.

you are completely right but there IS a reason why they can do that:

if banks are crahing the whole world economy is crashing and they know that they are needed.

for me this is one reason more why they should be regulated even harder than the rest of the world but some politicians think that this is not the case.

so either this politicians have no clue or they are on their payroll - there can´t be any other reason, because the third option would be such a diabolic plan that I doubt that even trump can think that criminal.

pimpmaster9000 · 03-13-2019, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire

Naw it's awesome. My kid was on the football team, there's cheerleaders camaraderie assemblies all that cool stuff.

in Australia he was just on the footy team no cheerleaders nothing

I'm mistaken coming back to America is the quality of life here isn't as good as it is in Australia for the same amount of work. My kid would have had a much better quality of life in Australia and would probably have his first home by now. most of his friends from high school and Australia have already bought their first home or their first rental property.

This italian dude I met in the DR built a hotel with his own hands...he has rental properties in italy and a 15 room hotel in the DR...he built everything himself...he kinda got rich by expanding a few rooms at a time...he started with a 1 bedroom house and expanded it to 4 and rented and rinsed and repeated...he fucks fat black milfs...great guy...

You should build...its great...

03-11-2019, 04:26 PM	#52
Bladewire StraightBro Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Monarch Beach, CA USA Posts: 56,232	Here is the fed chairman Jerome Powell talking about the economy slowing, and some of the red flags I've been posting about the last few months, on 60 minutes last Sunday. Keep in mind that it's his job not to scare anyone about where the US economy is headed.

03-12-2019, 02:03 AM	#59
jscott So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Taipei Posts: 25,198	everyone in America lives beyond their means, at every level, at unhealthy levels, at UNFAIR levels. It would only be fair, that USA would eventually need to pay back the debts. Per person, and at every scale.