Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread - Page 127 - Miata Turbo Forum -Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-29-2012, 03:54 AM   #2521
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
cordycord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,709
Total Cats: 125
Default sub prime GM

GM Ramps Up Risky Subprime Auto Loans To Drive Sales; Taxpayers Still Own 26.5% - Investors.com

“President Obama has touted General Motors (GM) as a successful example of his administration’s policies. Yet GM’s recovery is built, at least in part, on the increasing use of subprime loans. . . . Potential borrowers of car loans are rated on FICO scores that range from 300 to 850. Anything under 660 is generally deemed subprime. GM Financial auto loans to customers with FICO scores below 660 rose from 87% of total loans in Q4 2010 to 93% in Q1 2012. The worse the FICO score, the bigger the increase. From Q4 2010 to Q1 2012, GM Financial loans to customers with the worst FICO scores — below 540 — shot up 79% to more than $2.3 billion. The second worst category, 540-599, rose 28% from about $3.4 billion to $4.3 billion.”

At least it's a private company that's not risking our money...
cordycord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 09:21 AM   #2522
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
How so?
Because ALL employment dramatically was reduced starting in 2008. Federal levels were hardly impacted, in fact, federal levels were +10% by 2010 by nearly 200,000 positions were the private sector was down by almost 8 million. That graph doesn't paint a clear picture; it's biased.

And it's supposed to suggest that Obama is has something to do with the number, but this was not a reduction in the size of gov't or austerity measures, this was a reduction in the amount of jobs in the gov't (mainly at state/local), due to budgeting issues; local and state gov'ts actually have to pass a budget and use real money to pay employees.


and I don't care if he's spending at the slowest rate, it still doesn't excuse the fact that it's an issue, and a problem. Obama's budgets, which always get voted down, have entitlement spending over 50% of the federal budget. I almost wonder if that's a ploy to produce stats on "slowest spending ever." We currently spend over 2 billion dollars a day, and we don't take that much in.



cities in California aren't going bankrupt because they they take too much in in taxes, it's because they promise too much in entitlements. Slowing the increase in the amount of spending isn't good enough when you're throwing it all away...
Attached Thumbnails
Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-figure8.2.png  
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 09:38 AM   #2523
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
And besides, Scrappy voted for Ron Paul AND John McCain! He would NEVER troll the halls of Kos.
That's actually all true - I avoid the Daily Kos (angry left) like I avoid the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks of the world (angry right).

Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
The mayor of Boston doesn't seem to get it.

[ATTACH]50639[ATTACH]
Nice!

Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
At least it's a private company that's not risking our money...
See, Cord, we're really on the same side of most issues. The US government should not be the backstop of an auto company any more than it should be backstopping investment banks. (I do believe it should be a backstop, via the Federal Reserve as lender of last resort and the use of FDIC insurance, to traditional banks).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Because ALL employment dramatically was reduced starting in 2008. Federal levels were hardly impacted, in fact, federal levels were +10% by 2010 by nearly 200,000 positions were the private sector was down by almost 8 million. That graph doesn't paint a clear picture; it's biased.
A) Using 2010 as your end point is also biased as that includes the ramp up in temporary census hiring but does not include the elimination of those positions. See the third graph in your earlier post.

B) Your conclusion that "ALL employment dramatically was reduced starting in 2008" cannot possibly be accurate. Cord can fill you in on the details, but it turns out that you cannot fire people in the public sector.

Quote:
And it's supposed to suggest that Obama is has something to do with the number, but this was not a reduction in the size of gov't or austerity measures, this was a reduction in the amount of jobs in the gov't (mainly at state/local), due to budgeting issues; local and state gov'ts actually have to pass a budget and use real money to pay employees.
I agree with you on most of that, except for a subtle caveat. Obama could have dramatically impacted the state and local unemployment by spending his first year (when he had a Democratic majority in Congress) to pass spending bills that increased the amount of money that went to the state level and/or increasing tax cuts rather than working on jamming through a huge and divisive health care bill.

Last edited by Scrappy Jack; 07-29-2012 at 10:22 AM. Reason: Corrected sum gramer
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 09:41 AM   #2524
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

I wanted to see the one like I first posted go out to 2012, but couldn't.

and come on Cord, we don't live in France.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 12:18 PM   #2525
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
That's actually all true - I avoid the Daily Kos (angry left) like I avoid the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks of the world (angry right).
Good. I linked that for lulz, not for SRS BSNS

Quote:
See, Cord, we're really on the same side of most issues. The US government should not be the backstop of an auto company any more than it should be backstopping investment banks. (I do believe it should be a backstop, via the Federal Reserve as lender of last resort and the use of FDIC insurance, to traditional banks).
This sums up the position of just about everyone I know - left or right. The only people against it I know of are the auto company/investment bank employees and campaign donors.

Quote:
A) Using 2010 as your end point is also biased as that includes the ramp up in temporary census hiring but does not include the elimination of those positions. See the third graph in your earlier post.

B) Your conclusion that "ALL employment dramatically was reduced starting in 2008" cannot possibly be accurate. Cord can fill you in on the details, but it turns out that you cannot fire people in the public sector.


Quote:
I agree with you on most of that, except for a subtle caveat. Obama could have dramatically impacted the state and local unemployment by spending his first year (when he had a Democratic majority in Congress) to pass spending bills that increased the amount of money that went to the state level and/or increasing tax cuts rather than working on jamming through a huge and divisive health care bill.
Something I've noticed on here, Scrappy. If it's negative (The economy is BAAAADZZZZ! OMG!) it's Obama's fault by default, if it's positive (The budget is growing slower than inflation! Government jobs are being cut!) it cannot possibly be Obama's responsibility - even if the same logic and reasoning was applied previously to make that topic Obama's responsibility. It's why I only post here for lulz - as you pointed out above, anything that can be twisted, manipulated, or otherwise warped will be to smear the guy. I mean, as you can see from Brainy's post, Obama is responsible for *all* budget increases and/or attempts at budget increases, but never budget cuts. Obama's responsible for *all* increases in employment (Even for Census employment that was mandated decades in advance of Obama even being born....), but not for decreases in employment.

Anyways, what I actually wanted to post:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/op...ptic.html?_r=4
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 12:36 PM   #2526
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
I mean, as you can see from Brainy's post, Obama is responsible for *all* budget increases and/or attempts at budget increases, but never budget cuts.

im pretty sure my posts show that he's not responsible for any of it. HIS budgets have yet to be passed.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 03:43 PM   #2527
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
cordycord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,709
Total Cats: 125
Default

Just to be clear, I'M AGAINST THE SIZE AND POWER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHETHER CONTROLLED BY LEFT OR RIGHT.

Sorry for yelling.

At present, the group paddling fastest towards the fiscal cliff are the Democrats. Obama wants us all to jump in his speed boat. Most (not all) Republicans are content to go with the flow--to our collective doom--because they think they can't compete with Democrats in their district when they say "I want to cut spending and services."

And when people like Jack say "don't worry, we'll just print more money." it makes it harder to enact any sort of fiscal discipline. Is spending less than you take in really that hard? Doesn't everybody ELSE do that?

But really, how much of the money that you earn does the government "need"? Right now in California I'm 38% Fed + 9.5% State, plus sales tax, plus property tax, plus gas taxes, and I think I'm still paying for the Spanish American war via phone taxes. Let's not forget the EXHORBITANT fees I must pay my accountant and insurance agent just to stay in compliance with the rules. So in essence when I work a 12 hour day, over half the day is spent giving my money to an organization whose sole function seems to be ignoring their Constitutional reason for being, or making it harder for me to earn a living.

Last edited by cordycord; 07-29-2012 at 08:41 PM.
cordycord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2012, 11:42 PM   #2528
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
And when people like Jack say "don't worry, we'll just print more money." it makes it harder to enact any sort of fiscal discipline.
For what it's worth, cordy, I don't recall seeing Scrappy engage you on any kind of debate over prescriptive policy questions (ie, whether deficits are good or bad, appropriate levels and types of government spending, etc.). I have seen him repeatedly attempt to discover your understanding of the current monetary system and its implications.

In other words, it appears to me that Scrappy is reticent to argue over conclusions when the premises are not agreed upon. I can't say I find this position unreasonable.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 02:28 AM   #2529
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
cordycord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,709
Total Cats: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
For what it's worth, cordy, I don't recall seeing Scrappy engage you on any kind of debate over prescriptive policy questions (ie, whether deficits are good or bad, appropriate levels and types of government spending, etc.). I have seen him repeatedly attempt to discover your understanding of the current monetary system and its implications.

In other words, it appears to me that Scrappy is reticent to argue over conclusions when the premises are not agreed upon. I can't say I find this position unreasonable.
You're absolutely right. I have been a bit hard on Scrappy. I think mainly it's because we have differing economic and currency philosophies. What he said that stuck with me was;

Scrappy: "Being a sovereign issuer of a free-float fiat currency is not a theory. It is an observation of what is.

Saying a government controlled fixed currency (e.g a peg to gold) is better than what we have is an opinion. Basing predictions on what someone thinks should be, rather than what is, leads to flawed analysis like those examples I have pointed out (and many more that I haven't).

And, in many cases, that flawed analysis leads to high blood pressure and pulling out of one's hair unnecessarily () or to being curmudgeonly far beyond one's years ()."

My bottom line is that despite anyone's currency philosophy, good fiscal policy is good fiscal policy. We don't have that now. We have political gamesmanship at best, and pay for play at worst. As an example, I can show you some neat graphs that resulted from "cash for clunkers" that look positive and are completely the opposite from a macro standpoint.

I agree that even paper money has value, but my point is that the value behind the money is being actively debased. The debt, the deficit, the sluggish economy, regulations, our government's long range planning and energy policy are all working against the value of the dollar.
__________________
cordycord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 11:46 AM   #2530
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Post

If you are going to skip this post because it's too long, at least read the first indented portion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
You're absolutely right. I have been a bit hard on Scrappy. I think mainly it's because we have differing economic and currency philosophies.
This is the big disconnect I keep trying to explain.

"The gold standard is better" is a philosophy.
"The USA is currently a sovereign issuer of a free-float fiat currency" is an observation.

At no point have I said that the modern monetary system of the USA is better or worse than the gold standard (that I recall).
Understanding the current monetary system which underwent a HUGE change in 1971 (plus other changes in the late '70s, early '80s and again in the mid-'90s) is critical to reaching reasonably accurate predictions of outputs to policy changes.


Said another way, imagine there is a modern car with a high static compression, turbo-charged four-cylinder engine with variable cam timing and electronic fuel-injection (including direct-injection). The car is running very poorly.

A very smart, incredibly experienced old hot-rod tuner says, "We need to gap down the plugs and lean it out. That always worked for my carb'd big blocks." Several older hot-rod guys agree.

Another camp of hot-rod guys says, "No way! We've seen this problem with our carb'd big blocks in the past. If you lean it out and gap down the plugs, you'll just make it worse. You've got to richen it up first, then eventually lean it out." Lots of other older hot-rod guys agree.

Then, in the corner being largely ignored, you've got a group of guys that no one has ever heard of before. They say, "Hey - it's worth pointing out that this is not a carb'd big block and that should be taken in to consideration before applying any fixes."


Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
My bottom line is that despite anyone's currency philosophy, good fiscal policy is good fiscal policy.
Unfortunately, this is not accurate. It is just not that simple. This is like saying one tuning method (e.g. high static compression and lower boost) or one medical prescription (e.g. a strict diet and vigorous exercise routine) is always the best.

To that point...

Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
Is spending less than you take in really that hard? Doesn't everybody ELSE do that?
From a national level, the answer is no. The USA has run a deficit for a significant portion of its existence and many (most?) other nations run fiscal deficits so long as they run foreign trade deficits. When all nations run foreign trade surpluses, then all nations can run balanced government budgets and still allow the private sector to net save.

Remembering that in order for one nation to run a trade surplus, some other nation or nations must run deficits... Obviously, not all nations can run trade surpluses.



Historically, regarding the USA running a balanced budget, a government surplus or even major reduction of debt and deficits, see below:

Code:
Significant surplus or debt reduction	Depression or severe recession
         1817 - 1821                                   1819
         1823 - 1836                                   1837
         1852 - 1857                                   1857
         1867 - 1873                                   1873
         1880 - 1893                                   1893
         1920 - 1930                                   1929
         1993 - 2000                                     ?
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 01:15 PM   #2531
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
cordycord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,709
Total Cats: 125
Default

To keep the back and forth to a minimum, I'm just going to say that I understand what you're saying, and disagree that the remedies put forth at this time en toto are the proper ones.
cordycord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 01:55 PM   #2532
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

I think we should just let the Bloombergs of the world refuse facts and logic in favor of their own “feelings” and their misplaced confidence in their own superior intellect and infallibility. what's the worse that could happen?
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 01:59 PM   #2533
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by cordycord View Post
To keep the back and forth to a minimum, I'm just going to say that I understand what you're saying, and disagree that the remedies put forth at this time en toto are the proper ones.
Hurray! We do agree on some things. I also disagree that the remedies put forth at this time en toto are the proper ones.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 02:02 PM   #2534
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

I wonder if this is the solution:

Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 02:14 PM   #2535
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default







Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 02:19 PM   #2536
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default









Attached Thumbnails
Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-democrats_1861-2012-tpc.jpg   Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-penny_for_liberal_thoughts-sm.jpg   Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-obama_acupuncture_uncle_sam.jpg   Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-gun_control_ecard.jpg   Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-rich_democrats_out_of_touch_ecard.jpg  

Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 03:34 PM   #2537
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
cordycord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,709
Total Cats: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Me.
cordycord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 05:08 PM   #2538
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Default

It's hard to keep up with Braineack when only one of the site's I frequent ever has cartoons.



Attached Thumbnails
Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread-20120228.gif  
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 05:30 PM   #2539
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,115
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

what's interesting is that most my cartoons come form economists' blogs.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 06:03 PM   #2540
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
what's interesting is that most my cartoons come form economists' blogs.


So much makes sense now.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Project Gemini - Turbo Civic on the Cheap Full_Tilt_Boogie Build Threads 52 08-28-2016 05:18 AM
OTS Bilstein to motorsports ASN conversion stoves Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 5 04-21-2016 04:00 PM
Going back to stock. Need some 1.6 parts. Trent WTB 2 10-01-2015 01:15 PM
Leaky Wilwoods mx592 Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 1 10-01-2015 01:45 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:35 PM.