In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Iceland went through a complete revolution and doesn't have the economy or worldwide exposure that the united states did. If the Us dollar collapsed due to lack of TARP the worldwide oil market would have collapsed overnight. Wars would have started by nations ensuring its economy would be able to function and people would be able to be fed in a matter of days.
On March 13 2017 13:00 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: I want to say Estonia handled it well but I have no idea how.
Austerity politics that have lasted for almost the entirety of the republic, and a strong sense of fiscal responsibility. Pretty much why greece bothers some here much more than the refugee crisis.
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Yeah, you'd have to actually lock people up though. I don't think people appreciate how absurd our justice system is when it comes to the difference between white collar and blue collar crime.
Bake some pot brownies in Texas and you could be facing 20-life. Run a nation-wide identity theft and fake account scam, well just pay over a couple hundred million dollars and we'll call it good...
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Yeah, you'd have to actually lock people up though. I don't think people appreciate how absurd our justice system is when it comes to the difference between white collar and blue collar crime.
Bake some pot brownies in Texas and you could be facing 20-life. Run a nation-wide identity theft and fake account scam, well just pay over a couple hundred million dollars and we'll call it good...
And yet still people won't vote for someone who doesn't take big money for their campaign.
It baffles me how it is not obvious to everyone that campaign donations and lobbying are the main problems in American politics. It's not about economics, it's not about health care, it's not about education, it's not about crime, it's not about trade policy. It can't be about that until you solve the root cause of where the problems regarding these subjects are coming from.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-lobbying-idUSKBN16F26P Banks and other financial companies expecting big benefits from Republican-led deregulation spent record amounts on lobbying in the last election cycle, according to an advocacy group report released on Wednesday.
The financial sector spent $2 billion on political activity from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2016, including $1.2 billion in campaign contributions – more than twice the amount given by any other business sector, according to the study from Americans for Financial Reform.
That works out to $3.7 million per member of Congress and is the most ever tracked by the group, which analyzed spending data going back to 1990.
Furthermore, the actual amount is probably higher, because it did not include so-called "dark money": funds donated to political advocacy by nonprofit groups.
Among senators not running for president, Democrat Charles Schumer, now the minority leader, received the largest amount, with $5.3 million coming from financial firms. Mike Crapo, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and who was also in the top 10 from the Senate, received $2.1 million.
On March 13 2017 14:33 ShoCkeyy wrote: I sincerely think it's our education system.
DeVos paid her way into managing that for you.
Think again.
How can you expect politicians to hold an honest conversation about economy, crime, health care, or anything when their job security comes from campaign donations by companies that have a vested interest in those subjects? Votes may also be required, but you get votes by putting out ads and being in one of the parties that provide 'political infrastructure'.
Besides that obvious problem, these same companies band together to lobby politicians, meaning that they are swamped with what is nothing short of propaganda for these companies. Health care costs stay high, banks have shitty regulations and crimes are punished unfairly compared to the damage that they do to society.
Education isn't a solve all, since many people end up voting on their feelings that override their reason. Trump capitalized on feelings, Newt's interview at the convention basically showed that with the whole facts vs feelings thing. Trump picked feeling about economics, which everyone has a vested interest in. Clinton played on feelings as well, but her chosen path applied to a broader issues where a lot of them don't necessary apply to everyone as a personal vested interest. Women's issues? Men may support them but they don't directly impact them so it might get lower priority and aren't a make or break issue. Trump's shtick was to go after basic fears and discontent that apply to basically everyone. He may have been conning them but but again feelings over facts.
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Yeah, you'd have to actually lock people up though. I don't think people appreciate how absurd our justice system is when it comes to the difference between white collar and blue collar crime.
Bake some pot brownies in Texas and you could be facing 20-life. Run a nation-wide identity theft and fake account scam, well just pay over a couple hundred million dollars and we'll call it good...
And yet still people won't vote for someone who doesn't take big money for their campaign.
It baffles me how it is not obvious to everyone that campaign donations and lobbying are the main problems in American politics. It's not about economics, it's not about health care, it's not about education, it's not about crime, it's not about trade policy. It can't be about that until you solve the root cause of where the problems regarding these subjects are coming from.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-lobbying-idUSKBN16F26P Banks and other financial companies expecting big benefits from Republican-led deregulation spent record amounts on lobbying in the last election cycle, according to an advocacy group report released on Wednesday.
The financial sector spent $2 billion on political activity from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2016, including $1.2 billion in campaign contributions – more than twice the amount given by any other business sector, according to the study from Americans for Financial Reform.
That works out to $3.7 million per member of Congress and is the most ever tracked by the group, which analyzed spending data going back to 1990.
Furthermore, the actual amount is probably higher, because it did not include so-called "dark money": funds donated to political advocacy by nonprofit groups.
Among senators not running for president, Democrat Charles Schumer, now the minority leader, received the largest amount, with $5.3 million coming from financial firms. Mike Crapo, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and who was also in the top 10 from the Senate, received $2.1 million.
Campaign money doesn't impact political decisions unless they go to Republicans though. Which makes Crapo's (such a glorious name for a politician) $2.1 million much worse than Schumer's $5.3 million. Or at least that's what Democrats taught me in 2016.
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Yeah, you'd have to actually lock people up though. I don't think people appreciate how absurd our justice system is when it comes to the difference between white collar and blue collar crime.
Bake some pot brownies in Texas and you could be facing 20-life. Run a nation-wide identity theft and fake account scam, well just pay over a couple hundred million dollars and we'll call it good...
And yet still people won't vote for someone who doesn't take big money for their campaign.
It baffles me how it is not obvious to everyone that campaign donations and lobbying are the main problems in American politics. It's not about economics, it's not about health care, it's not about education, it's not about crime, it's not about trade policy. It can't be about that until you solve the root cause of where the problems regarding these subjects are coming from.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-lobbying-idUSKBN16F26P Banks and other financial companies expecting big benefits from Republican-led deregulation spent record amounts on lobbying in the last election cycle, according to an advocacy group report released on Wednesday.
The financial sector spent $2 billion on political activity from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2016, including $1.2 billion in campaign contributions – more than twice the amount given by any other business sector, according to the study from Americans for Financial Reform.
That works out to $3.7 million per member of Congress and is the most ever tracked by the group, which analyzed spending data going back to 1990.
Furthermore, the actual amount is probably higher, because it did not include so-called "dark money": funds donated to political advocacy by nonprofit groups.
Among senators not running for president, Democrat Charles Schumer, now the minority leader, received the largest amount, with $5.3 million coming from financial firms. Mike Crapo, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and who was also in the top 10 from the Senate, received $2.1 million.
Campaign money doesn't impact political decisions unless they go to Republicans though. Which makes Crapo's (such a glorious name for a politician) $2.1 million much worse than Schumer's $5.3 million. Or at least that's what Democrats taught me in 2016.
If nothing else, this election showed that for all that talk about how Republicans were destroying America with their obtuse legislative behavior from the Democrats, it turned out that all that really mattered was that Democrats wanted to be the winners. They were fully prepared to be the same obstructionists and crybabies that they said their opponents were. Now all we need is a Democrat Ted Cruz-like figure to obtuse her way to a government shutdown.
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Yeah, you'd have to actually lock people up though. I don't think people appreciate how absurd our justice system is when it comes to the difference between white collar and blue collar crime.
Bake some pot brownies in Texas and you could be facing 20-life. Run a nation-wide identity theft and fake account scam, well just pay over a couple hundred million dollars and we'll call it good...
And yet still people won't vote for someone who doesn't take big money for their campaign.
It baffles me how it is not obvious to everyone that campaign donations and lobbying are the main problems in American politics. It's not about economics, it's not about health care, it's not about education, it's not about crime, it's not about trade policy. It can't be about that until you solve the root cause of where the problems regarding these subjects are coming from.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-lobbying-idUSKBN16F26P Banks and other financial companies expecting big benefits from Republican-led deregulation spent record amounts on lobbying in the last election cycle, according to an advocacy group report released on Wednesday.
The financial sector spent $2 billion on political activity from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2016, including $1.2 billion in campaign contributions – more than twice the amount given by any other business sector, according to the study from Americans for Financial Reform.
That works out to $3.7 million per member of Congress and is the most ever tracked by the group, which analyzed spending data going back to 1990.
Furthermore, the actual amount is probably higher, because it did not include so-called "dark money": funds donated to political advocacy by nonprofit groups.
Among senators not running for president, Democrat Charles Schumer, now the minority leader, received the largest amount, with $5.3 million coming from financial firms. Mike Crapo, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and who was also in the top 10 from the Senate, received $2.1 million.
Campaign money doesn't impact political decisions unless they go to Republicans though. Which makes Crapo's (such a glorious name for a politician) $2.1 million much worse than Schumer's $5.3 million. Or at least that's what Democrats taught me in 2016.
If nothing else, this election showed that for all that talk about how Republicans were destroying America with their obtuse legislative behavior from the Democrats, it turned out that all that really mattered was that Democrats wanted to be the winners. They were fully prepared to be the same obstructionists and crybabies that they said their opponents were. Now all we need is a Democrat Ted Cruz-like figure to obtuse her way to a government shutdown.
And objections from independents will be met with "But they started it!"
On March 13 2017 12:44 KwarK wrote: The objection to TARP baffles me. The response to something being too big to fail isn't to let it fail and see what happens. The bailout was necessary to keep money coming out of ATMs and companies able to do their payroll.
Wasn't there some European country that said "fuck the shitty banks." and did pretty well coming out of it? I think it was Iceland.
Yeah, you'd have to actually lock people up though. I don't think people appreciate how absurd our justice system is when it comes to the difference between white collar and blue collar crime.
Bake some pot brownies in Texas and you could be facing 20-life. Run a nation-wide identity theft and fake account scam, well just pay over a couple hundred million dollars and we'll call it good...
And yet still people won't vote for someone who doesn't take big money for their campaign.
It baffles me how it is not obvious to everyone that campaign donations and lobbying are the main problems in American politics. It's not about economics, it's not about health care, it's not about education, it's not about crime, it's not about trade policy. It can't be about that until you solve the root cause of where the problems regarding these subjects are coming from.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-lobbying-idUSKBN16F26P Banks and other financial companies expecting big benefits from Republican-led deregulation spent record amounts on lobbying in the last election cycle, according to an advocacy group report released on Wednesday.
The financial sector spent $2 billion on political activity from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2016, including $1.2 billion in campaign contributions – more than twice the amount given by any other business sector, according to the study from Americans for Financial Reform.
That works out to $3.7 million per member of Congress and is the most ever tracked by the group, which analyzed spending data going back to 1990.
Furthermore, the actual amount is probably higher, because it did not include so-called "dark money": funds donated to political advocacy by nonprofit groups.
Among senators not running for president, Democrat Charles Schumer, now the minority leader, received the largest amount, with $5.3 million coming from financial firms. Mike Crapo, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and who was also in the top 10 from the Senate, received $2.1 million.
Campaign money doesn't impact political decisions unless they go to Republicans though. Which makes Crapo's (such a glorious name for a politician) $2.1 million much worse than Schumer's $5.3 million. Or at least that's what Democrats taught me in 2016.
If nothing else, this election showed that for all that talk about how Republicans were destroying America with their obtuse legislative behavior from the Democrats, it turned out that all that really mattered was that Democrats wanted to be the winners. They were fully prepared to be the same obstructionists and crybabies that they said their opponents were. Now all we need is a Democrat Ted Cruz-like figure to obtuse her way to a government shutdown.
And objections from independents will be met with "But they started it!"
Although obstructing everything on principle and playing the blame game is not a good way of running a country, there are definitely issues where the republican changed the rules and the democrat should not roll over just for the sake of being the responsible party. The republican refused Obama's SCOTUS appointee in an unprecedented way and were actually planning on doing the same to Hillary if she won, many of them saying the court ran fine when only 8 judges were in. In that instance I don't think the democrats should give an inch.
On March 13 2017 07:57 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: so is Steve King's political career over?
He's just as likely to get a bump in the polls as he is to fall in disgrace, you never know. Depends on how racist his constituency is. Judging by the fact that he's in office and this isn't the first thing he's tweeted, the answer is probably not.
Kellyanne Conway just revealed a new secret CIA technique of turning a microwave into a camera. This must be some top level physics hacks. Deep state really has no limits!
On March 13 2017 21:56 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Kellyanne Conway just revealed a new secret CIA technique of turning a microwave into a camera. This must be some top level physics hacks. Deep state really has no limits!
EPT
