On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 2:11:48 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?
Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

It's like deficit spending, tax cuts, and the national debt. His concern only
comes out selectively, depending on whether a Democrat or Republican is
involved.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 2:31:27 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.
Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

Like I posted previously, did you see Trump's latest shyster move? He had his
lawyers send cease and desist letters to the RNC and the Republican committees
that fund raise for the House and Senate, demanding that they stop using Trump's
name and photos in any fund raising. Trump claims only his PAC, that he controls,
that lines his pockets, can do that. Now imagine if any other former president
had done that. The party would be outraged, they would be seeing it as incredibly
selfish and stupid. But Trump does it and not a peep. That's another example
of the incredible damage we're living with. Trump has made the despicable
expected, normal and acceptable.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 7:31:39 AM UTC-4, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:05:29 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:50:56 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:56:22 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask"

.... before it was a pandemic.......

to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

.... after it became a pandemic and hundreds of thousands of people
died because they were too stupid to wear masks.

Is that too hard to understand?
[]'s

The only flaw in your logic is the number of covid infected people who
were wearing their mask and got it anyway.

And no one ever said masks or anything else is 100%. Even the Covid
deniers must know this, maybe they just can't help themselves.


You wear a mask to prevent TRANSMITTING the disease, which if
done deliberately is manslaughter.
I can't see the flaw in your logic. You do not appear to have
any.

+1

And it's a mask! A simple mask. The way these people act, you'd think it was
an amputation. It took Trump to turn this into another national **** show.
At least he's out of office. Down there you still have B, who could be Trump's
clone, doing incredible damage.

On 3/17/2021 2:31 AM, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:


Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.


It i going to take time but once some of these investigations are
complete I think he will be exposed as a shyster and be politically
done. He may need a couple more bankruptcies too.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:11:41 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?

Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

I had little use for the way some democrats wanted to interpret parts
of the constitution while ignoring other parts.
It is interesting that the Belknap case that you folks like to cite as
a precedent was defeated because Senators said it was
unconstitutional. There was little debate that Belknap had broken the
law. He still avoided prosecution after the failed impeachment trial.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

He is NOT the president, nor does he hold any political office or
wield any official powers. He is just a private citizen but he still
seems to be able to scare the **** out of you.
I am surprised you are not happy that it looks like he will gridlock
the GOP and hurt their chances in 2022-4.
I guess you understand Joe is likely to **** up their current
advantage.

On 3/17/2021 10:12 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

He is NOT the president, nor does he hold any political office or
wield any official powers. He is just a private citizen but he still
seems to be able to scare the **** out of you.
I am surprised you are not happy that it looks like he will gridlock
the GOP and hurt their chances in 2022-4.
I guess you understand Joe is likely to **** up their current
advantage.


What Trump damaged most were brains like Joyce's'

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:39:10 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 10:12:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.
Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

You're the one that is again in denial. Trump is the undisputed head of the GOP.
Leading Republicans are still behind him, saying that the party needs him going
forward. Trump's trumptard pick, McDaniels, still runs the RNC, even after
delivering unprecedented defeat. Trumpets control the state GOPs and they
are hell bent on punishing anyone that isn't on the Trump train, that dares to
speak out against him. The Republicans want Trump to help them win 2022.



Biden has saddled our kids with a third of Trump's debt in less than 2
months. He says he is not through yet.

Again, funny how you only complain about Biden's debt. Where were all
the posts about "Trumps debt"? Hell Trump added $2.9 tril in Covid relief
in less than one year. Not a peep there, only about Biden's $1.9 tril.

Trump never added $2T in one day.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:52:58 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 7:31:39 AM UTC-4, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:05:29 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:50:56 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:56:22 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask"

.... before it was a pandemic.......

to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

.... after it became a pandemic and hundreds of thousands of people
died because they were too stupid to wear masks.

Is that too hard to understand?
[]'s

The only flaw in your logic is the number of covid infected people who
were wearing their mask and got it anyway.

And no one ever said masks or anything else is 100%. Even the Covid
deniers must know this, maybe they just can't help themselves.


You wear a mask to prevent TRANSMITTING the disease, which if
done deliberately is manslaughter.
I can't see the flaw in your logic. You do not appear to have
any.

+1

And it's a mask! A simple mask. The way these people act, you'd think it was
an amputation. It took Trump to turn this into another national **** show.
At least he's out of office. Down there you still have B, who could be Trump's
clone, doing incredible damage.



Funny we still haven't seen that incredible damage. Our Covid numbers
are similar to California that is locking up people who break their
silly covid rules.

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 9:59:11 PM UTC-4, wrote:

You advocated last spring that it wasn't a big deal and that we should
just
let her rip. You're here now spreading FUD about the vaccines and masks.
You've made plenty of posts complaining that the death numbers must be
significantly inflated because hospitals are lying about the deaths to
make
money.

Let'r rip was your characterization. I just said the draconian path
wasn't warranted and we are seeing that here now.
I won't be surprised if we see more infections after spring break but
we won't have that hospital overload everyone was predicting. In fact
there were very few remote areas that even saw anything close to that.
Even in the worst hot spot in the country, NJ/NJ they never ran out of
ventilators and they sent the hospital ship home because it wasn't
being used. By the summer ventilators were a glut on the market. I
told you before, one of my former IBM buddies sells medical equipment
and he said there were warehouses full of them they couldn't sell. It
was just another irrational response to a problem.

Here you are again, Mr. Monday Quarterback, with the would have, could
have,
should have, AFTER the fact. I suppose you think Trump's lie and deny
was the
better approach, instead of getting the resources in place to save lives
in a worst
case scenario. And you act like we were nowhere near that. NYC
hospitals were
overflowing, trailers in the streets with dead bodies, field hospitals in
Central Park
and Javits taking in patients. Of course if Cuomo and Di Blasio hadn't
urgently
requested those resources under the conditions of the time and Covid got
worse
instead of better, you'd be here blaming them for not acting.









Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates,
significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1
trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now
suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No
surprise there.

You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.

Thanks for admitting it, right in the above. Like I said, you didn't
complain about
the Trump tax cut and increased spending on the deficits, but now you're
complaing
about it under Biden.
Again you are not reading. I have always complained about these
omnibus spending bills. That includes Trump's give away that was a
christmas tree for every left wing cause Chuck and Nancy could come up
with.

Missing in the above is complaining about Trump's tax cut. And I don't
recall
you complaining about any spending under Trump either, though you may
have.



Your main problem is that I don't hate Trump enough for you.

Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good
trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no
reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid
disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth
since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.

There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.

According to you. Funny, we didn't see you here saying there was no
reason for
Trump's tax cut and increased spending.
You weren't listening.

Sure, it's my listening, even after you pretty much confirmed it here
again yesterday,
by saying that you only pointed out that Trump's tax cut benefitted Joe
Six pack too.




That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I haven't seen a detailed analysis of what all is in it. I know there
has been
complaining because some of the money is going to projects like a bridge
in NY. But infrastructure spending is stimulative to the economy. A lot
of it is aid to cities, like NYC, that has been hit hard by Covid. The
economy
has taken a big hit, so have cities. That's why I said at least Biden's
deficit
increase is arguably justified. Trump did his deficit blowout with a
Goldylocks
economy, steadily growing since 2009, low unemployment, low inflation,
low interest rates. There was no justification, just a pack of lies
about a
terrible economy while he was running and then suddenly the same growth,
the same continuation under Trump was a great achievement. Is the new
Covid package too big? Not all going to where it should? Probably. You
can put the blame for that on yourself and the other Trumpets, who
defended
every horrible, stupid thing he did while he gutted the GOP. Now the WH,
House and Senate are lost and this is the result. I predicted it 5 years
ago.


I understand you and Rod think we can just keep borrowing and printing
money forever but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches us that
leads to a financial disaster.

That's a lie. I spoke out against Trump's tax cuts and increased
spending,
I said it would greatly increase the deficits, that were already at $500
bil.
But at least they were steadily declining, until Trump came along.

Your ONLY complaint about the tax cut was rich people got a taste.

That;s yet another lie. I spoke out against the tax cut as being
irresponsible
when we already had a $500 bil deficit and the economy was doing OK.
YOU responded again and again, justifying it, saying it was going to many
Americans, not just the rich, never saying it was a bad idea. And the
rich
not only got a taste, they got an order of magnitude more benefit than
Joe Sixpack.




In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

I've said the same thing many times. I said it when Trump was cutting
taxes
and increasing spending. You didn't.

Yes I did. I have said we should cut the DoD budget for years but you
still think we have that red menace and no amount is too much.

Show us a single post where I advocated for spending more on defense.
Or where I said anything at all about the defense budget.


That is the elephant in the room. It is second only to the
entitlements and more than interest on the debt.
You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.

That's not true either. There was no US debt that had to be bought from
the US treasury. The FED bought the debt in the open markets, from
people
already holding it, exactly as it has always done when it needs to
provide liquidity,
to stimulate the economy, to lower interest rates. The US didn't
suddenly
issue $4.5T of new debt.

Bull****, Nobody was holding that $4.5T they bought. It went straight
from the treasury to the fed. (or vice versa depending on how you look
at the phony bookkeeping).

That's wrong too. You clearly don't understand how the FED works. The
US govt did not issue $4.5T in new debt. If they did, where did that cash
go?
The deficit circa 2009 was $1.4T. That is all the new debt the govt had
to issue.
The rest, the bulk of the money creation was the FED buying securities in
the open
market, as they have done since day one to control the money supply. It's
the
FED's Open Market Operations. And they didn't just buy US govt securites
in 2009,
they bought mortgage backed securities too. Further, the FED NEVER buys
securities directly from the Treasury.



If Bernie Maydolf could have just printed the money to cover his debts
he would still be in Palm Beach sipping Pina Coladas.




I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

They will pay for it the same way that all US spending in excess of
revenue
is paid for, by issuing new debt.

At a certain point who is buying it? We are reaching the point that
there is not that much liquidity in the world economy.

Oh please. The world economy is as liquid as it's ever been.



That is why the
fed needs to print more money. At what point will people start to
realize the money supply far outweighs the value of goods and
services, then the central bank's thumb on the inflation scale will
not be enough to hold it down.

People will realize there is a problem, when there actually is a problem,
eg inflation rising. So far, deflation has been the larger problem.


We don't even have to go back a half century to see that happen.

It's an interesting question that I've never seen an explanation to.
Which is why inflation was so bad, starting in the late 60s, worsening
in the late 70s, but not today. If we buy your govt borrowing be the
driving problem, the govt budget and balance sheet back then was
way better than it's been for the last 20 years, but we've had little
inflation. And monetary policy has never been easier than it has
been since 2009, still no inflation. The internet is one powerful force
keeping prices down, but I've never heard a real attempt at explaining
it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation#Causes

Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

That's wrong too. What the US is doing is on the books, available for
all to see.
Banks, institutions, world banks, all see it, they know exactly what the
US govt
is doing. Bernie was a lying crook who issued totally made up financial
statements.

All can see but if you really look, what you see looks a lot like what
Bernie did. We have trillions that we say is a trust fund but it is
really just debt. The fed prints money to cover debt the treasury
can't sell on the market.

Again, that is simply wrong. The FED never buys securities directly from
the
Treasury and they are not buying them because no one else wants them.
The FED buys securities in the markets to increase or decrease the
available
money supply.



Most people just believe that because the
government says this is OK, that it is. You are one of them.

That's a lie. I've spoken out against deficits and the national debt,
constantly, including when Trump irresponsibly cut taxes and increased
spending.


Google up Weimar Republic and see what happens when debts overwhelm a
country's ability to pay.
At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On that point, you're correct, that interest rates will rise at some
point.
Hopefully Treasury has the vast majority of debt in 20+ maturities, in
which
case the immediate impact won't be severe.
They don't
There are about $5T in bills that expire in weeks or months
There is $11T in Notes that may only last 2 years, 10 max
$2.9T is in T bonds.
Most of the T bonds are held by SS/MC.
$6.4T is in "Series" bonds. (the kind regular folks buy)
The rest is a mix of other paper.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/...cipal_debt.htm

You're right about that. I guess the morons are doing the ARM mortgage
deal.
Take on huge risk of interest rates rising in order to keep today's
payments
low. So if rates rise, there will be an immediate impact, I see about
25%
is in Tbills, 50% in 2 to 10 year maturities.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:37:22 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/17/2021 2:31 AM, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:


Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.


It i going to take time but once some of these investigations are
complete I think he will be exposed as a shyster and be politically
done. He may need a couple more bankruptcies too.

Another bankruptcy or two won't shock me, just to duck the civil
judgements that come out of these investigations but I hope you are
not too disappointed if he doesn't do time.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:07:43 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:11:41 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?

Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

I had little use for the way some democrats wanted to interpret parts
of the constitution while ignoring other parts.

Like you're doing right now?

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:12:05 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

He is NOT the president

In other news, water is wet.

Seriously, could you be any less informed?

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:37:22 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/17/2021 2:31 AM, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:


Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.


It i going to take time but once some of these investigations are
complete I think he will be exposed as a shyster and be politically
done. He may need a couple more bankruptcies too.

A couple of convictions wouldn't hurt either, but in the current climate,
his supporters would just complain about how unfair it all is.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:49:10 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 2:31:27 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.
Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

Like I posted previously, did you see Trump's latest shyster move? He had his
lawyers send cease and desist letters to the RNC and the Republican committees
that fund raise for the House and Senate, demanding that they stop using Trump's
name and photos in any fund raising. Trump claims only his PAC, that he controls,
that lines his pockets, can do that. Now imagine if any other former president
had done that. The party would be outraged, they would be seeing it as incredibly
selfish and stupid. But Trump does it and not a peep. That's another example
of the incredible damage we're living with. Trump has made the despicable
expected, normal and acceptable.

Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need more
of what this guy is selling."

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:00:33 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:07:43 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:11:41 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?

Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

I had little use for the way some democrats wanted to interpret parts
of the constitution while ignoring other parts.

Like you're doing right now?

I am looking at more than one phrase and you seem to be stuck on that
ignoring the word "and".

(Removal from office AND disqualification to hold any office...)
All other language implies this refers to a sitting president, not a
former president.
I understand you like the idea of 67 Senators taking away the will of
the voter in this particular circumstance but if it was anyone else we
were talking about, you would hold the opposite view.
Your TDS is showing.

BTW I thought impeaching Clinton was stupid too. I also understood it
was going nowhere.
As I have said, we have had 4 impeachments in 232 years and 3 of them
were in the last 25 years. ALL were political hatchet jobs. None were
more egregious than the first one. (Johnson was impeached over an
unconstitutional law)

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:02:03 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:12:05 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

He is NOT the president

In other news, water is wet.

Seriously, could you be any less informed?

You seem to be the one who is confused.
Trump is just a loudmouth living in South Florida.
I assume you were this upset when Rush was alive and you probably have
your panties in a wad about Carlson, Hannity and the rest.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:08:35 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:49:10 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 2:31:27 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.
Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

Like I posted previously, did you see Trump's latest shyster move? He had his
lawyers send cease and desist letters to the RNC and the Republican committees
that fund raise for the House and Senate, demanding that they stop using Trump's
name and photos in any fund raising. Trump claims only his PAC, that he controls,
that lines his pockets, can do that. Now imagine if any other former president
had done that. The party would be outraged, they would be seeing it as incredibly
selfish and stupid. But Trump does it and not a peep. That's another example
of the incredible damage we're living with. Trump has made the despicable
expected, normal and acceptable.

Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need more
of what this guy is selling."

If you and trader are right, the GOP will get screwed in the midterm,
the Trump love will quickly go away, assuming they don't dump him
before that.
If they pick up seats, hold on to your hat. It is going to be a bumpy
ride.

I would be happier if they all found better candidates but that is not
likely.
It was sad that the best we could do last year was Trump and Biden.

On 3/17/2021 5:09 PM, wrote:


I would be happier if they all found better candidates but that is not
likely.
It was sad that the best we could do last year was Trump and Biden.


YES ! ! !

Not only for President but many in Congress should go home. Both parties.

I really hoped Trump would be decent but he was not. That is the only
reason I voted for Biden but would really prefer someone else from
either side.

Congress needs an overhaul, starting at the top of both parties.

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On 3/17/2021 5:09 PM, wrote:


I would be happier if they all found better candidates but that is not
likely.
It was sad that the best we could do last year was Trump and Biden.


YES ! ! !

Not only for President but many in Congress should go home. Both parties.

I really hoped Trump would be decent but he was not. That is the only
reason I voted for Biden but would really prefer someone else from either
side.

And thats why so many voted for Trump, hoping that he
would be better than just another professional politician.

Turned out that he was in fact much worse than most.

Congress needs an overhaul, starting at the top of both parties.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 16:24:57 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:00:33 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:07:43 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:11:41 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?

Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

I had little use for the way some democrats wanted to interpret parts
of the constitution while ignoring other parts.

Like you're doing right now?

I am looking at more than one phrase

No, you wanted to ignore the Constitution when it talked about House
impeachments and subsequent Senate trials. You wanted to toss the
impeachment trial into the Federal court system, remember? And now that you
agree with something that you think is supported by the Constitution,
you're all on board.

You can't expect to make stuff up and not have anyone notice.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 16:27:18 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:02:03 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:12:05 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

He is NOT the president

In other news, water is wet.

Seriously, could you be any less informed?

You seem to be the one who is confused.

Yep, I'm sure it seems that way to you.

On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 11:27:10 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


And that¢s why so many voted for Trump, hoping that he
would be better than just another professional politician.

Turned out that he was in fact much worse than most.

Not for about half of the American population, senile smartass!

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

On 3/17/21 8:27 PM, Rod Speed wrote:
And thats why so many voted for Trump, hoping that he
would be better than just another professional politician.

Turned out that he was in fact much worse than most.


Biden's puppet masters are so much better.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:04:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the problems.
The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together into securities and
selling shares in them to investors. It was fundamentally sound, not leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages. The only problem was in the lending
practices where banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans to
people with marginal ability to be able to keep up with the payments on real
estate that had already appreciated sharply and was over valued. And then
when the problems started, it was further complicated by the fact that investors
only knew they had an investment in mortgages, without any way of knowing
how many of those mortgages were in trouble, what the properties were really
worth at the moment, etc.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would not have simply meant a lot of
people got evicted. There were huge losses there, because the values of the
properties declined, the real estate market turned poor, millions of properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value. THAT is what lead to the huge
losses, those were real and would have been widespread whether the mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which went bankrupt), held by banks,
or held by the seller.



Commercial
banks like BoA were heavily invested in them with depositor money.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, BOA and similar didn't invest in MBS. They originated
the mortgage loans, packaged them into MBS and sold them to investors.
And banks have always had exposure to mortgage loan risk, that's their business.
Prior to MBSs banks passed mortgages on to Fannie and Freddie, this was similar.



Much of that bail out money also went to bail out foreign investors.
That is why it was claimed to be a global crisis.

Show us your proof for that claim, because I suspect it's also BS. I never
heard of *any* of the 2009 bail out money going to foreign investors. It was
a worldwide crisis, because when the core of the US financial system is in crisis, it
will always be a worldwide crisis. I can't help again notice that you're just like
Trump, just make it up on the fly.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:12:27 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.
He is NOT the president, nor does he hold any political office or
wield any official powers. He is just a private citizen but he still
seems to be able to scare the **** out of you.

He should scare the **** out of all Americans after seeing the enormous damage
he did to this country over the past 5 years. The damage started while he was a
private citizen and it's continuing as he's a private citizen. Just because he had even
more capacity to do damage, like lying about a stolen election that he lost, destroying the
credibility of our elections, ending in an insurrection, doesn't mean that it's over.
He's the leader of the Republican Party, they are still solidly behind him.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:47:04 AM UTC-4, wrote:

You weren't listening.

Sure, it's my listening, even after you pretty much confirmed it here again yesterday,
by saying that you only pointed out that Trump's tax cut benefitted Joe Six pack too.

Maybe I am just not as big a whiner as you and you can't talk about
anything without whining about Trump.

If you want to talk about whiners, the biggest whiner has been Trump. It's always
someone else that's to blame, always someone else to demonize and complain
about. That's what he did for 4 years, instead of doing his job.


In 10 years Trump will just be another unpopular president, along with
some of the others like GW Bush who we don't hear much about today. I
remember when he was the worst president ever too.

Please, don't try to normalize Trump by trying to equate him to Bush or any other
former president. In ten years, Trump will be starting to earn his place in the
history books for the despicable, un-American POS that he is.




That;s yet another lie. I spoke out against the tax cut as being irresponsible
when we already had a $500 bil deficit and the economy was doing OK.
YOU responded again and again, justifying it, saying it was going to many
Americans, not just the rich, never saying it was a bad idea. And the rich
not only got a taste, they got an order of magnitude more benefit than
Joe Sixpack.

Listen I said ANY ****ING TAX CUT was a bad idea. Is that clear
enough?

You sure weren't saying that when you defended Trump's tax cut that helped
double the deficits. Like you confirm now, you just said that it benefitted
Joe Six pack in addition to rich people. And you never said it while Trump
was in office. But now you're concerned about deficits, with Biden in office.


I am the only guy here who seems to think the debt is important.

That's a lie, I spoke out against Trump's tax cut, while you were defending it.
I've spoken out here about the national debt, in many threads directly with you
for years. I spoke out about it again this week.


Your complaint about the cut wasn't that it was a bad idea, only that
you thought the people who pay the most taxes were getting a break.

That's another lie. I spoke about both.






In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

I've said the same thing many times. I said it when Trump was cutting taxes
and increasing spending. You didn't.

Yes I did. I have said we should cut the DoD budget for years but you
still think we have that red menace and no amount is too much.

Show us a single post where I advocated for spending more on defense.
Or where I said anything at all about the defense budget.

Show me where you complained about it. That seems to be the bar.

I spoke out against Trump's irresponsible tax cut and increased spending.
I told you it would greatly increase the deficits, while Trump and the Republicans
lied and claimed it would not. That was enough. We need to address the
overall problem. Trump addressed it alright. He made it twice as bad.



You
are also the first one to talk about how we need to protect ourselves
from the evil russians. You were in favor of every war we have had in
the last 30 years. It certainly sounds like you support ther DoD
budget to me.

That is the elephant in the room. It is second only to the
entitlements and more than interest on the debt.
You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.

That's not true either. There was no US debt that had to be bought from
the US treasury. The FED bought the debt in the open markets, from people
already holding it, exactly as it has always done when it needs to provide liquidity,
to stimulate the economy, to lower interest rates. The US didn't suddenly
issue $4.5T of new debt.

Bull****, Nobody was holding that $4.5T they bought. It went straight
from the treasury to the fed. (or vice versa depending on how you look
at the phony bookkeeping).

That's wrong too. You clearly don't understand how the FED works. The
US govt did not issue $4.5T in new debt. If they did, where did that cash go?
The deficit circa 2009 was $1.4T. That is all the new debt the govt had to issue.
The rest, the bulk of the money creation was the FED buying securities in the open
market, as they have done since day one to control the money supply. It's the
FED's Open Market Operations. And they didn't just buy US govt securites in 2009,
they bought mortgage backed securities too. Further, the FED NEVER buys
securities directly from the Treasury.

If the fed is buying US debt they are buying it from the treasury ...
period.

Attempt to move goal posts and obfuscate, noted. This is what you posted:

"It went straight from the treasury to the fed. "



Calling it the open market is just more smoke and mirrors.

Perhaps to you. Fact is the open markets are trading US treasuries around the
world among buyers and sellers of all kinds, institutions, govts, central banks,
not just the FED.


The
debt came from the bailout. There was no way "the market" was going to
absorb an extra $4.5T so the fed bought the debt.

There was no $4.5T in debt from the bailout in 2009. Can't you do simple math?
The budget deficit was ~$1.4 tril, not $4.5 tril. If the US govt issued $4.5T in
new debt, where did the other $3.4 tril go? Again, you're confusing FED
Open Market Operations with govt borrowing. They are totally different.
And of that $1.4 tril deficit, maybe $500 bil was TARP, which was REPAID
by the recipients to the govt in later years.




You can generate all the phony paperwork you want but the bottom line
was the government borrowed $4.5T more than the market was able to
lend so the fed printed the money.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You're just like Trump. Get it all wrong, then just keep
doubling and tripling down.


They called it "quantitive easing"
a euphemism for monetizing debt.

That is when the FED buys existing securities in the OPEN MARKET. It's not
the issuance of NEW DEBT. It's the FED acquiring securities that already
exist, buying them in the US financial market where they are tradeed. And while
previously the FED only bought US treasury securities, in 2009 the bought
a lot of mortgage backed securities, that was a large part. Following your
claims of how the process works, the US govt would have had to issue new
mortgages and the FED would have bought them directly from the US govt.
It doesn't work that way.


If Bernie Maydolf could have just printed the money to cover his debts
he would still be in Palm Beach sipping Pina Coladas.




I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

They will pay for it the same way that all US spending in excess of revenue
is paid for, by issuing new debt.

At a certain point who is buying it? We are reaching the point that
there is not that much liquidity in the world economy.

Oh please. The world economy is as liquid as it's ever been.

Exactly and that is not liquid enough to absorb huge debts like that
so the fed creates money out of thin air to buy the debt.

Wrong, as always and previously explained.



Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

That's wrong too. What the US is doing is on the books, available for all to see.
Banks, institutions, world banks, all see it, they know exactly what the US govt
is doing. Bernie was a lying crook who issued totally made up financial statements.

All can see but if you really look, what you see looks a lot like what
Bernie did. We have trillions that we say is a trust fund but it is
really just debt. The fed prints money to cover debt the treasury
can't sell on the market.

Again, that is simply wrong. The FED never buys securities directly from the
Treasury and they are not buying them because no one else wants them.
The FED buys securities in the markets to increase or decrease the available
money supply.

Yummy Kool Ade you got there scooter.

Fine, remain ignorant, your choice.




Most people just believe that because the
government says this is OK, that it is. You are one of them.

That's a lie. I've spoken out against deficits and the national debt,
constantly, including when Trump irresponsibly cut taxes and increased
spending.


Google up Weimar Republic and see what happens when debts overwhelm a
country's ability to pay.
At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On that point, you're correct, that interest rates will rise at some point.
Hopefully Treasury has the vast majority of debt in 20+ maturities, in which
case the immediate impact won't be severe.
They don't
There are about $5T in bills that expire in weeks or months
There is $11T in Notes that may only last 2 years, 10 max
$2.9T is in T bonds.
Most of the T bonds are held by SS/MC.
$6.4T is in "Series" bonds. (the kind regular folks buy)
The rest is a mix of other paper.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/...cipal_debt.htm

You're right about that. I guess the morons are doing the ARM mortgage deal.
Take on huge risk of interest rates rising in order to keep today's payments
low. So if rates rise, there will be an immediate impact, I see about 25%
is in Tbills, 50% in 2 to 10 year maturities.
The question is how old are those notes? When do they have to be
rolled over? It is clear we have no way to redeem them without just
printing the money.

They get redeemed just like they have mostly been redeemed forever. Treasury
issues new ones.

It would be helpful if you could trim posts.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:48:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:39:10 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 10:12:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.
Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

You're the one that is again in denial. Trump is the undisputed head of the GOP.
Leading Republicans are still behind him, saying that the party needs him going
forward. Trump's trumptard pick, McDaniels, still runs the RNC, even after
delivering unprecedented defeat. Trumpets control the state GOPs and they
are hell bent on punishing anyone that isn't on the Trump train, that dares to
speak out against him. The Republicans want Trump to help them win 2022.



Biden has saddled our kids with a third of Trump's debt in less than 2
months. He says he is not through yet.

Again, funny how you only complain about Biden's debt. Where were all
the posts about "Trumps debt"? Hell Trump added $2.9 tril in Covid relief
in less than one year. Not a peep there, only about Biden's $1.9 tril.

Trump never added $2T in one day.


So, what was this then? Fake news? Alternate facts?

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/27/hous...-to-trump.html

"Trump signs $2 trillion coronavirus relief bill as the US tries to prevent economic devastation

President Donald Trump signed a $2 trillion coronavirus relief bill on Friday, as Washington tries to blunt economic destruction from the pandemic ripping through the United States.
The House earlier passed the stimulus package, believed to be the largest in U.S. history, by voice vote, which simply measures if more lawmakers shout for €œaye€� or €œnay€� on whether to support it."

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:08:40 PM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:49:10 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 2:31:27 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.
Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

Like I posted previously, did you see Trump's latest shyster move? He had his
lawyers send cease and desist letters to the RNC and the Republican committees
that fund raise for the House and Senate, demanding that they stop using Trump's
name and photos in any fund raising. Trump claims only his PAC, that he controls,
that lines his pockets, can do that. Now imagine if any other former president
had done that. The party would be outraged, they would be seeing it as incredibly
selfish and stupid. But Trump does it and not a peep. That's another example
of the incredible damage we're living with. Trump has made the despicable
expected, normal and acceptable.
Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need more
of what this guy is selling."

Actually the RNC didn't cave in, they told Trump to go screw himself on that one.
They said he's a public figure and they can continue to do what they've been doing,
using his name and photos. Next move is up to Trump. But it does show how
despicable and deranged he is. And how he doesn't care about the RNC or country,
only himself.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:27:40 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:02:03 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:12:05 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:31:20 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

He is NOT the president

In other news, water is wet.

Seriously, could you be any less informed?
You seem to be the one who is confused.
Trump is just a loudmouth living in South Florida.
I assume you were this upset when Rush was alive and you probably have
your panties in a wad about Carlson, Hannity and the rest.

Those other blowhards are also doing great damage, even Rush is still on the air.
They have some things right, but instead of anything positive, a Reagan approach
to the issues, it's mostly nasty, divisive, ranting.

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 5:09:25 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:08:35 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 05:49:10 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 2:31:27 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.
Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

Like I posted previously, did you see Trump's latest shyster move? He had his
lawyers send cease and desist letters to the RNC and the Republican committees
that fund raise for the House and Senate, demanding that they stop using Trump's
name and photos in any fund raising. Trump claims only his PAC, that he controls,
that lines his pockets, can do that. Now imagine if any other former president
had done that. The party would be outraged, they would be seeing it as incredibly
selfish and stupid. But Trump does it and not a peep. That's another example
of the incredible damage we're living with. Trump has made the despicable
expected, normal and acceptable.

Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need more
of what this guy is selling."
If you and trader are right, the GOP will get screwed in the midterm,
the Trump love will quickly go away, assuming they don't dump him
before that.
If they pick up seats, hold on to your hat. It is going to be a bumpy
ride.

I would be happier if they all found better candidates but that is not
likely.
It was sad that the best we could do last year was Trump and Biden.

That's about the only thing you've posted in a week that I agree with.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 23:44:43 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 16:24:57 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:00:33 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:07:43 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 01:11:41 -0500, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?

Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

I had little use for the way some democrats wanted to interpret parts
of the constitution while ignoring other parts.

Like you're doing right now?

I am looking at more than one phrase

No, you wanted to ignore the Constitution when it talked about House
impeachments and subsequent Senate trials. You wanted to toss the
impeachment trial into the Federal court system, remember? And now that you
agree with something that you think is supported by the Constitution,
you're all on board.

You can't expect to make stuff up and not have anyone notice.

How many examples of trials after the person left office can you come
up with? We have Belknap and Trump. (both failed on constitutional
grounds) Do you have another one?

On 3/18/2021 8:21 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:08:40 PM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:

Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need more
of what this guy is selling."

Actually the RNC didn't cave in, they told Trump to go screw himself on that one.
They said he's a public figure and they can continue to do what they've been doing,
using his name and photos. Next move is up to Trump. But it does show how
despicable and deranged he is. And how he doesn't care about the RNC or country,
only himself.


I'm not sure it was a good idea yet. I can support a real Republican
candidate but not a Trumpster. If you associate yourself with the
shyster you lose my vote. If you distance yourself, you got my vote.

On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:04:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the problems.
The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together into securities and
selling shares in them to investors. It was fundamentally sound, not leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages. The only problem was in the lending
practices where banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans to
people with marginal ability to be able to keep up with the payments on real
estate that had already appreciated sharply and was over valued. And then
when the problems started, it was further complicated by the fact that investors
only knew they had an investment in mortgages, without any way of knowing
how many of those mortgages were in trouble, what the properties were really
worth at the moment, etc.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would not have simply meant a lot of
people got evicted. There were huge losses there, because the values of the
properties declined, the real estate market turned poor, millions of properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value. THAT is what lead to the huge
losses, those were real and would have been widespread whether the mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which went bankrupt), held by banks,
or held by the seller.



You really need to read more about what derivatives are. One mortgage
ended up being many times as much in "bets" for and against that
mortgage.
Maybe you could just watch the "Big Short" movie if you don't like to
read.


Commercial
banks like BoA were heavily invested in them with depositor money.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, BOA and similar didn't invest in MBS. They originated
the mortgage loans, packaged them into MBS and sold them to investors.
And banks have always had exposure to mortgage loan risk, that's their business.
Prior to MBSs banks passed mortgages on to Fannie and Freddie, this was similar.

They were exposed because of vehicles like AIG that sold insurance on
the mortgage or insurance on the insurance on the mortgage. .




Much of that bail out money also went to bail out foreign investors.
That is why it was claimed to be a global crisis.

Show us your proof for that claim, because I suspect it's also BS. I never
heard of *any* of the 2009 bail out money going to foreign investors. It was
a worldwide crisis, because when the core of the US financial system is in crisis, it
will always be a worldwide crisis. I can't help again notice that you're just like
Trump, just make it up on the fly.

Again look at who was invested just in AIG. (there were other similar
operations, just not as big).

On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 9:34:43 AM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 3/18/2021 8:21 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:08:40 PM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:

Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need more
of what this guy is selling."

Actually the RNC didn't cave in, they told Trump to go screw himself on that one.
They said he's a public figure and they can continue to do what they've been doing,
using his name and photos. Next move is up to Trump. But it does show how
despicable and deranged he is. And how he doesn't care about the RNC or country,
only himself.

I'm not sure it was a good idea yet. I can support a real Republican
candidate but not a Trumpster. If you associate yourself with the
shyster you lose my vote. If you distance yourself, you got my vote.

I'm 100% with you Ed. And sadly most of the Republicans politicians are
still supporters. A good example of the addled thinking was expressed last
week by Lindsey Graham. He said that Trump has a dark side and he also
has "magic". Graham said he's trying to work with the magic. That's his thinking,
despite seeing what working with the Trump magic has produced for the
past five years. I predicted five years ago that Trump would result in a
disaster for Republicans and conservatives. But I didn't see it ending with
them continuing to follow him down the toilet. His magic resulted in the loss
of the WH, Senate and House. The Republicans want more.

On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 9:35:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:04:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the problems.
The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together into securities and
selling shares in them to investors. It was fundamentally sound, not leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages. The only problem was in the lending
practices where banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans to
people with marginal ability to be able to keep up with the payments on real
estate that had already appreciated sharply and was over valued. And then
when the problems started, it was further complicated by the fact that investors
only knew they had an investment in mortgages, without any way of knowing
how many of those mortgages were in trouble, what the properties were really
worth at the moment, etc.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would not have simply meant a lot of
people got evicted. There were huge losses there, because the values of the
properties declined, the real estate market turned poor, millions of properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value. THAT is what lead to the huge
losses, those were real and would have been widespread whether the mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which went bankrupt), held by banks,
or held by the seller.


You really need to read more about what derivatives are. One mortgage
ended up being many times as much in "bets" for and against that
mortgage.

I know exactly what derivatives are. You show us proof for your claim that MBSs
resulted in one mortgage being turned into may times as much in "bets". It
was not a leverage problem with MBSs, it was a leverage problem with the
mortgages themselves. It was not the MBSs that created the problem.
The problem was lenders making increasingly risky loans to people with marginal
ability to pay. ARM loans with low introductory rates, 5% down mortgages,
mortgages where with two incomes they could barely afford it. Appraisers
over valuing properties. Those mortgages were then pooled together into MBS
and sold to investors.

There were derivative securities based on MBSs that transferred risk, but blaming
them for the disaster is silly. It would be like blaming options on GM stock for
being responsible for GM going bankrupt, instead of their low sales, high expenses
and losses. Or blaming futures on soybeans for putting them in the toilet, when
prices dropped because of Trump's tariffs.





Maybe you could just watch the "Big Short" movie if you don't like to
read.

I see part of your problem. You think movies are factual. Maybe you could post
proof here to back up your claims.


Commercial
banks like BoA were heavily invested in them with depositor money.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, BOA and similar didn't invest in MBS. They originated
the mortgage loans, packaged them into MBS and sold them to investors.
And banks have always had exposure to mortgage loan risk, that's their business.
Prior to MBSs banks passed mortgages on to Fannie and Freddie, this was similar.

They were exposed because of vehicles like AIG that sold insurance on
the mortgage or insurance on the insurance on the mortgage. .

Waiting for proof.....


Much of that bail out money also went to bail out foreign investors.
That is why it was claimed to be a global crisis.

Show us your proof for that claim, because I suspect it's also BS. I never
heard of *any* of the 2009 bail out money going to foreign investors. It was
a worldwide crisis, because when the core of the US financial system is in crisis, it
will always be a worldwide crisis. I can't help again notice that you're just like
Trump, just make it up on the fly.

Again look at who was invested just in AIG. (there were other similar
operations, just not as big).

If the test is that if the govt bails out any company and foreigners own some of
the stock, then just about every bailout is going to be bailing out foreigners.
Bringing up AIG as an example was a bad idea. Apparently you're unaware that they
repaid all the bailout money, with interest. So did all the banks. Ive told you that
many times here over the years. Yet folks like you keep ignoring it, pretending it
was a taxpayer give away. And now the new claim is that much of it went to foreigners.

trader_4 writes:
On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 9:35:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:04:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the problems.
The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together into securities and
selling shares in them to investors. It was fundamentally sound, not leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages. The only problem was in the lending
practices where banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans to
people with marginal ability to be able to keep up with the payments on real
estate that had already appreciated sharply and was over valued. And then
when the problems started, it was further complicated by the fact that investors
only knew they had an investment in mortgages, without any way of knowing
how many of those mortgages were in trouble, what the properties were really
worth at the moment, etc.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would not have simply meant a lot of
people got evicted. There were huge losses there, because the values of the
properties declined, the real estate market turned poor, millions of properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value. THAT is what lead to the huge
losses, those were real and would have been widespread whether the mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which went bankrupt), held by banks,
or held by the seller.


You really need to read more about what derivatives are. One mortgage
ended up being many times as much in "bets" for and against that
mortgage.

I know exactly what derivatives are. You show us proof for your claim that MBSs
resulted in one mortgage being turned into may times as much in "bets". It
was not a leverage problem with MBSs, it was a leverage problem with the
mortgages themselves. It was not the MBSs that created the problem.
The problem was lenders making increasingly risky loans to people with marginal
ability to pay. ARM loans with low introductory rates, 5% down mortgages,
mortgages where with two incomes they could barely afford it. Appraisers
over valuing properties. Those mortgages were then pooled together into MBS
and sold to investors.

Here's a reference for Fretwell to chew on.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cdo.asp

trader_4 wrote
wrote

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too.

Yep.

AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the problems.

Correct.

The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together
into securities and selling shares in them to investors.

Thats securitisation, not derivatives. Different animal entirely.

It was fundamentally sound, not leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages.

Yep and radically reduces risk because of the bundling.

The only problem was in the lending practices where
banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans
to people with marginal ability to be able to keep up
with the payments on real estate that had already
appreciated sharply and was over valued.

The real problem was the AAA ratings that they didnt
even come close to qualifying for. That allowed operations
like govt who could only invest in AAA rated securitys
to invest their surplus short term cash in those and
when the housing bubble burst, as it was always going
to, no one had any idea what those securitys were
actually worth and so no bank would lend any other
bank on the short term money market, so most of the
financial system imploded very spectacularly indeed.

And then when the problems started, it was further
complicated by the fact that investors only knew
they had an investment in mortgages, without
any way of knowing how many of those mortgages
were in trouble, what the properties were really
worth at the moment, etc.

And it is never possible to know that when a housing
bubble bursts. Particularly with the terminally stupid
US non recourse system where you are free to hand
the keys back and walk away with no penalty. And
when so many were actually stupid enough to lend
more than the value of the property, those who
intended to flip the property before the sucker
interest rate hiked to normal rates, they didnt
even lose the initial mortgage payments, the
lender handed those to the borrower.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would
not have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. There were huge losses there,
because the values of the properties declined,

Imploded in many cases because no one
was writing those mortgages anymore.

the real estate market turned poor, millions of properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value.

With the borrower free to hand the keys back and
walk away with no penalty at all with the mortgagee
left with the close to worthless property.

THAT is what lead to the huge losses, those were real
and would have been widespread whether the mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which
went bankrupt), held by banks, or held by the seller.

Yeah, Fretwell has never had a ****ing clue about what
2008 was about.

Commercial banks like BoA were heavily
invested in them with depositor money.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, BOA and similar didn't invest in MBS.
They originated the mortgage loans, packaged them into MBS
and sold them to investors. And banks have always had exposure
to mortgage loan risk, that's their business. Prior to MBSs banks
passed mortgages on to Fannie and Freddie, this was similar.

Much of that bail out money also went to bail out foreign investors.
That is why it was claimed to be a global crisis.

Show us your proof for that claim, because I suspect it's also BS.

Yep, **** all ended up with foreign investors.

I never heard of *any* of the 2009 bail
out money going to foreign investors.

Some may have done to those who managed to
sue financial institutions that convinced them to
invest in AAA mortgage backed securitys, MBSs.

It was a worldwide crisis, because when the core of the US
financial system is in crisis, it will always be a worldwide crisis.

And because vast numbers of operations world wide
invested in US MBSs and came to regret doing that.
Even my local council did that and got bitten.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:04:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the
problems.
The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together into securities
and
selling shares in them to investors. It was fundamentally sound, not
leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages. The only problem was in the
lending
practices where banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans to
people with marginal ability to be able to keep up with the payments on
real
estate that had already appreciated sharply and was over valued. And then
when the problems started, it was further complicated by the fact that
investors
only knew they had an investment in mortgages, without any way of knowing
how many of those mortgages were in trouble, what the properties were
really
worth at the moment, etc.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would not have simply meant a lot
of
people got evicted. There were huge losses there, because the values of
the
properties declined, the real estate market turned poor, millions of
properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value. THAT is what lead to the
huge
losses, those were real and would have been widespread whether the
mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which went bankrupt), held
by banks,
or held by the seller.

You really need to read more about what derivatives are.

You really need to read more about what mortgage
backed securitys are and why 2008 happened.

One mortgage ended up being many times as
much in "bets" for and against that mortgage.

The mortgages were bundled and securitized, stupid.

Maybe you could just watch the "Big Short"
movie if you don't like to read.

Its irrelevant to what produced 2008 but certainly explains
why you don't have a ****ing clue about what produced that.

Commercial banks like BoA were heavily
invested in them with depositor money.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, BOA and similar didn't invest in MBS. They
originated
the mortgage loans, packaged them into MBS and sold them to investors.
And banks have always had exposure to mortgage loan risk, that's their
business.
Prior to MBSs banks passed mortgages on to Fannie and Freddie, this was
similar.

They were exposed because of vehicles like AIG that sold insurance
on the mortgage or insurance on the insurance on the mortgage. .

Wrong, as always.

Much of that bail out money also went to bail out foreign investors.
That is why it was claimed to be a global crisis.

Show us your proof for that claim, because I suspect it's also BS.
I never heard of *any* of the 2009 bail out money going to foreign
investors. It was a worldwide crisis, because when the core of the
US financial system is in crisis, it will always be a worldwide crisis.
I can't help again notice that you're just like Trump, just make it
up on the fly.

Again look at who was invested just in AIG.

**** all were foreigners.

(there were other similar operations, just not as big).

Still **** all foreigners.

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 9:34:43 AM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 3/18/2021 8:21 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:08:40 PM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:

Yep, I saw that. Of course, as a public figure, Trump has no legal
basis on
which to stand, but the RNC totally caved. I guess they've seen the
WH, the
House, and the Senate slip away and all they can think of is, "We need
more
of what this guy is selling."

Actually the RNC didn't cave in, they told Trump to go screw himself on
that one.
They said he's a public figure and they can continue to do what they've
been doing,
using his name and photos. Next move is up to Trump. But it does show
how
despicable and deranged he is. And how he doesn't care about the RNC or
country,
only himself.

I'm not sure it was a good idea yet. I can support a real Republican
candidate but not a Trumpster. If you associate yourself with the
shyster you lose my vote. If you distance yourself, you got my vote.

I'm 100% with you Ed. And sadly most of the Republicans
politicians are still supporters. A good example of the addled
thinking was expressed last week by Lindsey Graham. He said
that Trump has a dark side and he also has "magic".

He's right, he clearly does appeal to about half who bothered to vote
and they believe in him fervently. It would be stupid to ignore those.

They wont be changing who they vote for any time soon,
you watch. Lets not forget that MORE of them voted for
Trump this time than did in the first election.

All Joe has to do is **** up as all dems always do when
they get to drive the bus and Trump will be back, you watch.

Graham said he's trying to work with the magic. That's his thinking,

And thats the only sensible thing for them to do right now.

despite seeing what working with the Trump
magic has produced for the past five years.

It produced millions more voting for
Trump than did the first time, stupid.

I predicted five years ago that Trump would result
in a disaster for Republicans and conservatives.

But it didnt. He did lose, but not by much.

But I didn't see it ending with them continuing
to follow him down the toilet.

Yep, you actually are that ignorant about how politics works.

His magic resulted in the loss of the WH, Senate and House.

Not by that much.

The Republicans want more.

They realise that Joe will inevitably **** up and that
they could easily see the repugs back in control
of all but the presidency after the half terms.