Video & Multimedia

AdHocSolver

(2,561 posts)

56. Your logic does NOT compute.

Sat Aug 3, 2013, 05:40 PM

Aug 2013

Equating the entire banking system to a relative handful of crooked banks is a fraudulent argument.

Back in the 1929 to 1932 time period, the banking system did collapse. The resulted in passage of the Glass-Steagall Act and other banking reforms which eventually allowed the U.S. economy to recover.

The post-WWII recovery period saw an unprecedented economic boom, and a substantial increase in the American middle class.

Money does not drive the economy. Demand drives the economy. Those millions of Americans who lost their homes cost the economy billions of dollars in DEMAND for goods and services. The multiplier effect produced in this case caused a much larger negative effect on the economy than the failure of a handful of crooked banks would have produced.

You not only seem to have have no clue "how money works", you seem to lack an understanding how an economy works.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

99 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Geithner Admitted Administration Sacrificed Homeowners to ''Foam the Runway'' for Banks [View all] Octafish Aug 2013 OP

"Keep this in mind while Obama prattles on about his undying support for the middle class." bahrbearian Aug 2013 #1

Neil Barofsky Gave Us The Best Explanation For Washington's Dysfunction We've Ever Heard Octafish Aug 2013 #26

K&R especially for this post. JDPriestly Aug 2013 #62

Kicked and Recommended! Enthusiast Aug 2013 #84

Just read that book. Really appalling. Geithner was strictly on the banks' side. eppur_se_muova Aug 2013 #95

My library has this book. CrispyQ Aug 2013 #97

+++ 1,000 +++ n/t RKP5637 Aug 2013 #78

K&R. The proof is in the program's massive, allowed, failure MotherPetrie Aug 2013 #2

One guy on TV. iandhr Aug 2013 #3

If you watch the video you will hear him say that Geithner told him Autumn Aug 2013 #5

Let me guess your point. Because it's hearsay it couldnt possibly have happened. In other words, rhett o rick Aug 2013 #6

10 million families yanked out of their homes in foreclosures; $20 billion 2nd qtr 2013 profit jtuck004 Aug 2013 #23

Not "one guy on TV", the former Solicitor General for TARP AZ Progressive Aug 2013 #70

Im not surprised. Actions speaks louder than words. We need bonniebgood Aug 2013 #4

We just need to take back our party from the Turd Way. nm rhett o rick Aug 2013 #7

What is more important...a few million home owners or the entire banking system? dkf Aug 2013 #8

Are you kidding? Are you FUCKING kidding? LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #9

Yes I'm serious. I know many on this site have no appreciation for banks but it is the lending dkf Aug 2013 #10

You make the assumption that our banking system is decent, and THAT'S a stretch... LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #11

If you had to choose one you'd choose a few million homeowners and crash the banking system? dkf Aug 2013 #14

I would save the millions of homeowners and let the irresponsible private banks fail fasttense Aug 2013 #18

Did you live through 2007-2008? dkf Aug 2013 #42

Really what we are experiencing is nothing? fasttense Aug 2013 #88

They let the banks fail in '29 and it led to the Great Depression. Blanks Aug 2013 #92

Nationalize the banks... KansDem Aug 2013 #91

Yes Vanje Aug 2013 #99

To suggest the banking system would fall because of the homeowners is utter BULLSHIT... LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #35

I have no idea where you get that I think it was due to homeowners. dkf Aug 2013 #43

I have no idea where you get that 'it's ok to sacrifice millions of homeowners' LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #48

That's ridiculous. Whatever happened to those homeowners was not the pivotal point. dkf Aug 2013 #57

Whatever happened to them??? Seriously, Seriously fascist. Really LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #68

But they aren't lending. progressoid Aug 2013 #12

If they have excess reserves they hold it at the Fed. dkf Aug 2013 #13

No. They're not. (and you know it) nt LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #41

You have not been paying attention. dkf Aug 2013 #45

You are the one turning a blind eye, dear...they ain't lending, and you damn well know it. nt LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #49

The Fed is. That's where the banks excess reserves go to. dkf Aug 2013 #51

It is labor and the excess supply of goods created by labor fasttense Aug 2013 #17

But lending allows the investment that allows the use of labor to create excess supply. dkf Aug 2013 #20

You can NOT lend unless labor has already created the wealth fasttense Aug 2013 #90

NO it is the spending by the people in this country that creates the matthews Aug 2013 #19

You could sell to someone else. dkf Aug 2013 #21

And who would that be? And how would that make an 'economy'? matthews Aug 2013 #24

How did it work for China? dkf Aug 2013 #27

China and the US aren't the same. The economy of China only matthews Aug 2013 #40

Last year a Chinese bank was the largest in the world. Many of the top banks are. dkf Aug 2013 #47

So??????????????? nt matthews Aug 2013 #59

Yeah but when they stop lending and start hoarding the whole thing grinds to a halt tularetom Aug 2013 #36

Yet we don't want them lending indiscriminately again. dkf Aug 2013 #61

No. It was the banks that WRECKED our economy. Vanje Aug 2013 #98

Economies existed long before banks were ever created. fasttense Aug 2013 #15

Yeah what kind of economies did we have back then? Subsistence farming? dkf Aug 2013 #22

Since you brought it up, the Bible has a fair bit to say about money lenders Electric Monk Aug 2013 #37

I speak of him as a historical person since I am an Atheist. dkf Aug 2013 #50

That is what you think the country was founded on? Made the progress to become matthews Aug 2013 #39

Lenders yes, but privately owned banks fasttense Aug 2013 #89

FDR answered that in roughly 1933. Homeowners more important than thieving bankers. jtuck004 Aug 2013 #25

And taxpayers and homeowners don't use banks? dkf Aug 2013 #28

Thieving, lying bankers and the politicians they buy are not necessary, no. n/t jtuck004 Aug 2013 #29

Lol. Stop using yours then. No credit cards, checks... dkf Aug 2013 #31

Conflating good business with thievery. The Master's money can buy many tongues. n/t jtuck004 Aug 2013 #34

Oh so you do love what the banks allow you to do. dkf Aug 2013 #58

When thieves do their work, many good things leave as well. I wonder why you want to piss jtuck004 Aug 2013 #67

Are heroin dealers necessary to having drug manufacturers? n/t jtuck004 Aug 2013 #30

Not really. dkf Aug 2013 #33

How money works and how power works KT2000 Aug 2013 #46

Did you see the results of the modification programs? dkf Aug 2013 #60

Guess what KT2000 Aug 2013 #69

Your logic does NOT compute. AdHocSolver Aug 2013 #56

You have not been keeping up with how the banking system has changed. dkf Aug 2013 #64

The change in the banking system occurred with repeal of Glass-Steagall which legalized thievery. AdHocSolver Aug 2013 #71

This isn't pure economics, it's the reality of how the system works. dkf Aug 2013 #72

All my posts apply to how our banking system really works. AdHocSolver Aug 2013 #74

but if that happened ceonupe Aug 2013 #80

What I described was why our current banking system failed the U.S. economy. AdHocSolver Aug 2013 #82

Considering they used the bailouts for bonuses for themselves and lavish parties? Spitfire of ATJ Aug 2013 #73

THANK GAWD IT PASSED!!!!!!!1 cui bono Aug 2013 #87

I hope I live to see the day when this rat bastard gets jail time. n.t truedelphi Aug 2013 #16

I just listened to that video and he never says "designed to sacrifice homeowners." pnwmom Aug 2013 #32

Ifa. Coulda. Woulda. Shoulda. DeSwiss Aug 2013 #55

But the program was designed to sacrifice homeowners, because the banks designed it TiberiusB Aug 2013 #85

Whatever the banks did, the administration didn't design the program to sacrifice pnwmom Aug 2013 #86

I disagree TiberiusB Aug 2013 #96

I'm shocked, I tell you: absolutely shocked! Who woulda' ever thunk it? indepat Aug 2013 #38

Citizens Used As 747 Crash Pads Such That Oligarch Bankers Might Have A Soft Landing - Despicable cantbeserious Aug 2013 #44

''Foam the runway?'' DeSwiss Aug 2013 #52

Actually the words fit perfectly. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #54

And the banks PROFITED from it. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #53

Admitted! Fuck u Tim G. Fuck u. We don't need no admission. It's as plain as fuckung day. geckosfeet Aug 2013 #63

Geithner should be made an honorary Republican Jack Rabbit Aug 2013 #65

as should Obama burnodo Aug 2013 #81

The got $7 trillion in cheap loans and the fuckers still didn't help out the homeowners. GoneFishin Aug 2013 #66

I don't think the runway was foamed for the banks ...... AnneD Aug 2013 #75

Helicopter Ben and Foam the Runway 'Geithner - what a team! bananas Aug 2013 #76

Trust NOT these guys ... for me, they have lost all credibility, I only half listen to RKP5637 Aug 2013 #77

Nice to knew we did our part in getting flattened by an out of control 747. leveymg Aug 2013 #79

It's not like I didn't suspect this and worse. Enthusiast Aug 2013 #83

Those who control public finances sulphurdunn Aug 2013 #93

WOW! BillyRibs Aug 2013 #94