Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

So about that economy thing?

I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 12:33:54 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Why are the U.S. government pumping millions daily into banks when they turn down a 30 billlion request from the car manufacturer's, who employ far more than the banks. God knows what the banks will do with that cash. All they're doing is lending it to business who can't pay them back. leading to more trouble. But who cares.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 1:35:35 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 12:33:54 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Why are the U.S. government pumping millions daily into banks when they turn down a 30 billlion request from the car manufacturer's, who employ far more than the banks. God knows what the banks will do with that cash. All they're doing is lending it to business who can't pay them back. leading to more trouble. But who cares.

Because fear can cause everyone to take their money out of banks. Google the great depression. Even though the FDIC guarantees deposits of up to 100,000 people are generally too stupid to understand this and take their money out anyway. Therefore the government did this to back up the financial system and stop idiots from taking their money out.

The people can't take their money out of cars and they won't stop buying cars if a company or two who was too stupid to invest in fuel efficient cars fail.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 1:43:49 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
I guess that did happen with Northern Rock. But that means all the money is in the hands of a powerful few. One slip up and were F****d. If people take their money out, we have greater control. They could set up local credit union style set up where loans are given to those who really need it. It would advert this whole disaster as if one place collapses, it's not the end of this whole thing.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 2:12:56 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 1:43:49 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
I guess that did happen with Northern Rock. But that means all the money is in the hands of a powerful few. One slip up and were F****d. If people take their money out, we have greater control. They could set up local credit union style set up where loans are given to those who really need it. It would advert this whole disaster as if one place collapses, it's not the end of this whole thing.

LULZ

Are you being serious? Tell me your joking. Take a course in macroeconomics before responding.

So you think bankers just take the money that is given to them and keep it in some giant vault underground don't you?

LULZ you crack me up. Money is lended to others. Think of it like this

YOU ---your money----> The Bank ----yourmoney--->Person who needs money for their business

Person who needs money ---Interest--->Bank takes cut of interest----interest ---->YOU

Bank collects portion of interest for the money because there is a risk that the loaner will not pay them back and file for bankruptcy. However YOU are guaranteed to get your money back by the bank. Therefore if the person can't pay it back the bank eats it.

If we were to take out the banks then people would be getting screwed instead of the banks. Additionally banks do extensive research and hire knowledgable people called Risk Analysists to determine whether or not a loan should be given and at what interest rate.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 2:49:17 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 2:12:56 PM, askbob wrote:

LULZ

Are you being serious? Tell me your joking. Take a course in macroeconomics before responding.

So you think bankers just take the money that is given to them and keep it in some giant vault underground don't you?

LULZ you crack me up. Money is lended to others. Think of it like this


YOU ---your money----> The Bank ----yourmoney--->Person who needs money for their business



Person who needs money ---Interest--->Bank takes cut of interest----interest ---->YOU

Bank collects portion of interest for the money because there is a risk that the loaner will not pay them back and file for bankruptcy. However YOU are guaranteed to get your money back by the bank. Therefore if the person can't pay it back the bank eats it.

If we were to take out the banks then people would be getting screwed instead of the banks. Additionally banks do extensive research and hire knowledgable people called Risk Analysists to determine whether or not a loan should be given and at what interest rate.

Trust me, I joke ,I joke, I kid I kid! I know banks invest in oil and stuff to get proit and give it back to you.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 3:47:39 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
If we didn't have crap like Federal Reserve, FDIC, and whatnot, wouldn't be a problem-- people would invest in competent bankers, instead of politically backed bankers :D
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 3:53:05 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 3:47:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If we didn't have crap like Federal Reserve, FDIC, and whatnot, wouldn't be a problem-- people would invest in competent bankers, instead of politically backed bankers :D

If we didn't have the government run a bank, then the government might just have a chance of, well, I don't know, running out of money? Just a possibility?
Once again a conservative or statist want to join in?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 4:02:09 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 3:53:05 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 12/6/2008 3:47:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If we didn't have crap like Federal Reserve, FDIC, and whatnot, wouldn't be a problem-- people would invest in competent bankers, instead of politically backed bankers :D

If we didn't have the government run a bank, then the government might just have a chance of, well, I don't know, running out of money?
So? Would teach them a lesson about responsibility :D.

Like I dunno, teaching them to earn money before spending it.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 4:05:41 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 4:02:09 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/6/2008 3:53:05 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:


If we didn't have the government run a bank, then the government might just have a chance of, well, I don't know, running out of money?
So? Would teach them a lesson about responsibility :D.

Like I dunno, teaching them to earn money before spending it.

Ye, but where do they put the money in the first place? Under the president's bed? In a vault 300 ft under the ground? In a private bank where it could easily be lost, and is basically referencing one bank over the other, or put it in a competent state-run bank?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
DiablosChaosBroker
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 4:10:14 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 4:02:09 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/6/2008 3:53:05 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 12/6/2008 3:47:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If we didn't have crap like Federal Reserve, FDIC, and whatnot, wouldn't be a problem-- people would invest in competent bankers, instead of politically backed bankers :D

If we didn't have the government run a bank, then the government might just have a chance of, well, I don't know, running out of money?
So? Would teach them a lesson about responsibility :D.

Like I dunno, teaching them to earn money before spending it.

The government is already out of money. $10 trillion in debt actually.
http://news.bbc.co.uk...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 4:11:39 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 12/6/2008 4:05:41 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 12/6/2008 4:02:09 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/6/2008 3:53:05 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:


If we didn't have the government run a bank, then the government might just have a chance of, well, I don't know, running out of money?
So? Would teach them a lesson about responsibility :D.

Like I dunno, teaching them to earn money before spending it.

Ye, but where do they put the money in the first place? Under the president's bed? In a vault 300 ft under the ground? In a private bank where it could easily be lost, and is basically referencing one bank over the other, or put it in a competent state-run bank?

They can have a treasury without having a bank. Jeez.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2008 4:13:40 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
BTW, keep in mind I never said it absolutely should not run a bank... just should not have crap like the Federal Reserve and FDIC-- i.e., should not interfere with private banks, and should not have banks that print unbacked currency. If it wants to run a profitable, full-reserve bank, without any help from taxes, fine by me.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 4:09:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/6/2008 12:33:54 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Why are the U.S. government pumping millions daily into banks when they turn down a 30 billlion request from the car manufacturer's, who employ far more than the banks. God knows what the banks will do with that cash. All they're doing is lending it to business who can't pay them back. leading to more trouble. But who cares.

Wrong. They didn't lend it to businesses, that was the deal, but they didn't do that. Instead, they used the taxpayers' cash to pay themselves massive bonuses.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...