User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 60

  1. #41
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    So it's "the value of the group" and not "your personal values", Fe instead of Fi, but it still F.

    Anyway, your POV is not based on reason.
    im not talking about Fe stuff either
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  2. #42
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    im not talking about Fe stuff either
    What's sure is that you doesn't make sense.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  3. #43
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    You're wrong on both these counts.

    Greater education in the history of financial crises would rectify this problem.
    Tell me how I'm wrong?

    No one can "know" with any real certainty what would have happened.

    Had I been in charge, I would have let the banks fail, and dissolve the corporate entities, but used bailout $ to insure the toxic assets on those entities ledgers.

    Just because I would have let the banks themselves fail doesn't mean I wouldn't take the steps necessary to insure those assets in an effort to limit the financial crunch suffered by the public.

    The concept of the bailout was fine. The fact that it allowed the worst offenders in the melt down to continue operating was not.

    Lastly, I would have made sure that the toxic assets supported by the bail out would be transferred back to the private market as quickly as possible.

  4. #44
    Senior Member UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    To be honest the politicians aren't the problem.

    The problem is the never ending campaign cycle, and the fact that to have any reasonable shot at a higher office one must fall in with one of the parties.

    As political parties have gained strength politicians have been increasingly forced to toe the line of the party platform creating a dichotomous political system with no avenue for action outside of the platforms of either Republicans or Democrats.

    I am certain, that if it was feasible and there would be no blowback, a large portion of our elected officials would be willing to put good governance in front of the party platform.

    Unfortunately, public discourse on politics is so paltry that most just look to the parties to decide their opinions for them, and thus those trying to act outside of the party system have little chance of reaching the public.
    I think the bigger problem is the amount of money/lobbying in politics.
    For all that we have done, as a civilization, as individuals, the universe is not stable, and nor is any single thing within it. Stars consume themselves, the universe itself rushes apart, and we ourselves are composed of matter in constant flux. Colonies of cells in temporary alliance, replicating and decaying and housed within, an incandescent cloud of electrical impulses. This is reality, this is self knowledge, and the perception of it will, of course, make you dizzy.

  5. #45
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UniqueMixture View Post
    I think the bigger problem is the amount of money/lobbying in politics.
    The electoral problems I mentioned, are what allows money to play as large a role as it does.

    The whole reason politicians are coin operated is because of how expensive its become to run a campaign.

    If you fix campaign finance, politicians won't need an amount of $ to get elected that pushes them into the deep pockets of corporate benefactors.

  6. #46
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    What's sure is that you doesn't make sense.
    you stopped making sense ages ago
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #47
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    I wouldn't hold my breath.

    Without a stated goal, or any greater level of coherence than we see now, Occupy will remain the drum circle in the park it has been.
    Not exactly. The whole Occupy movement is diffused because that was the original goal. What has happened because of that diffusion speaks for itself. A worldwide movement that has further reaches than the Tea Party itself. In other nations(and in America in a lesser degree) currently, people are occupying their stocks and demanding that CEO DON'T get a pay raise just because they are CEO's. People are stopping banks from taking homes. People are stopping big stores from building over a community lot.

    If you look at the whole Occupy movement more closely, there are quite a few goals and demands that aren't stated but inferred. What I've found that are very related to one another is:

    1: Income inequality
    2: Accountability: of Wall Street and K-Street and more transparency in the government system.
    3: Community: Take back the city - foreclosed homes, ailing small businesses that are part of that community, police brutality.

    Each and every city and country have similar but also differentiated goals than the next city over, but that is because that one city can be quite different from the next. Take Oakland and SF for a striking example. Oakland itself has a huge problem with its militant police force. SF, on the other hand, has less of a police problem and more of a problem about how immigrants are treated (similarly to L.A.)

    It is just the MSM don't really talk about these things because they don't go into detail about the whole movement itself or that they work for the very companies that do not want to get into detail about these things.

  8. #48
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rail Tracer View Post
    In other nations(and in America in a lesser degree) currently, people are occupying their stocks and demanding that CEO DON'T get a pay raise just because they are CEO's.
    I have a hard time drawing the connection between shareholders voting against pay packages for CEO's and the occupy movement.

    I doubt, those shareholders have lived in a tent in Zucotti park.

    I also think that CEO pay inequality was already a salient issue with the public before Occupy got started.

    Occupy may have increased the level of coverage on inequality, but by no means did it start the conversation.
    People are stopping banks from taking homes. People are stopping big stores from building over a community lot.
    Evidence of this happening?

    If you look at the whole Occupy movement more closely, there are quite a few goals and demands that aren't stated but inferred. What I've found that are very related to one another is:

    1: Income inequality
    2: Accountability of Wall Street, and in extension, K-Street and more transparency in the government system.
    3: Community - Take back the city.
    Vague axioms are good and all, but without anything more specific (how bout a policy proposal) I have a hard time seeing this going anywhere.

    In my humble opinion the greatest success of Occupy thus far has been the level of publicity garnered.

    The links you are trying to draw between occupy, and changes in our economic landscape are pretty tenuous.

  9. #49
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Evidence of this happening?
    That, I can only infer you to look up (even on MSM) about how people are blocking banks from taking over foreclosed homes because the family can't pay up.

    However, right next to Berkeley, people are trying to stop more land development in an area that used to be filled with grassland and farms. They've actually started a community farm on that tract that runs the risk of being token over because UCBerkeley now owns that land and want to use it for corn research and a list of other "things" (as of now, they're still trying to come up with negotiations on the tract of land.)

  10. #50
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Tell me how I'm wrong?
    As I said, I don't really want to have this discussion, as I've had it a million times, and when you're talking with people who don't know what they're talking about, about a matter that you do know what you're talking about, it's not really enjoyable. It's like Galileo trying to tell people of his time that the Earth revolves around the Sun. They simply lack the knowledge to understand why what he says is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    No one can "know" with any real certainty what would have happened.
    In any matter there is uncertainty.

    That does not change the fact that, if you actually understood the situation we were facing, and understand the ramifications of not coming in as the lender of last resort, and bailing out the entire financial system, that the damage would have been incredible. Truly unbelievable. And, frankly, I don't think you actually understand it. I doubt you have a strong enough understanding of the financial system and its role in the economy to accurately understand these ramifications.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Had I been in charge, I would have let the banks fail, and dissolve the corporate entities, but used bailout $ to insure the toxic assets on those entities ledgers.
    By your merely stating this, I cannot help but feel that you have no idea what you're talking about.

    I see a lot of what they say about enneagram 8s in your response: you know what you would do, and think everybody else should follow it, but that doesn't mean that what you would do actually has any strong or reasonable connection to reality whatsoever. This is not a personal attack, it is an observation. As you should know, I agree with you on a lot of stuff when it comes to politics, far more than most people. But you simply are wrong about this matter. And it's not simply a matter of "you disagree with me, therefore you're wrong" (as some [ignorant] people have accused me of before). You simply were (and therefore are) not in a position to understand the consequences of not stepping in and doing what we did.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Just because I would have let the banks themselves fail doesn't mean I wouldn't take the steps necessary to insure those assets in an effort to limit the financial crunch suffered by the public.
    Once again, when I read this, I can't help but feel it's coming from someone who genuinely has no idea what he's talking about. Once again, not an attack, it's just, no one who actually understands these matters would talk in this way. It just isn't in sync with how things work/would have worked had you attempted it. What you think should have been done isn't actually a feasible solution, and it would have led to disaster.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    The concept of the bailout was fine. The fact that it allowed the worst offenders in the melt down to continue operating was not.
    New Century Financial: gone.

    Bear Sterns: gone.

    Lehman: gone.

    Merrill: gone.

    Countrywide: gone.

    Washington Mutual: gone.

    427 banks: gone.

    I wouldn't say the worst offenders in the crisis have gotten through unscathed.

    Even of those that have survived: look at their stock prices compared to before the crisis.

    Bank of America and Citi, the two biggest behemoths before the crisis, now look like the walking dead.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Lastly, I would have made sure that the toxic assets supported by the bail out would be transferred back to the private market as quickly as possible.
    Once again, this reeks of not knowing what you're talking about.

    The private market would've been effectively gone.

    I don't think you understand the spillover effects of a complete financial system collapse.

    And yes, there would have been a complete collapse of the financial system had they not stepped in as they did.

    And, following that complete collapse of the financial system, would have come a devastating collapse of the entire economy.

    Look how bad it already was:



    And, had we not intervened, it would've been far worse.

Similar Threads

  1. Hillary won't reign in Wall Street
    By SearchingforPeace in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-29-2016, 10:16 PM
  2. Why do people keep comparing the US to Europe?
    By Haphazard in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 03-21-2010, 06:48 PM
  3. Why Prayer is a SIN and affront to God
    By nozflubber in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 03-05-2009, 11:08 AM
  4. Some reaons why McCain and Obama are both BS
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 10-03-2008, 09:05 PM
  5. [INTJ] Why do a lot of people seem to have lots of negative views about INTJs?
    By bai_lin83 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 01-21-2008, 12:30 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO