Socialism for the Uninformed (ideology, bias, amendment, Texas)

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

I could, but here's the thing...

The SEC's report page numbers don't match the pdf file page numbers. That's going to confuse liberals because they simply lack the critical thinking skills required to discern the difference between pdf file page numbers and the actual document's page numbers.

I'll give you the SEC's document page numbers, though: 17 and 18

https://www.sec.gov/news/studies/200...tion070808.pdf

Lol. So the first 17 pages are blank or you simply couldn't find anything? M Lolololololololololololol.

No one thinks you are honest as you won't quote any of the other findings... Why is that?

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Doesn't seem like that at all. The ratings agencies publicly disclosed EXACTLY what they do and do not do. Even the SEC admits that.

The rating agencies had the power to regulate themselves and they blew it. The private financial sector blew it and they had to pay billions out in settlements.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

Those of us who aren't uninformed understand that in contemporary America, we have socialism for the wealthy and capitalism for the rest of us.

How do you explain the $1 trillion spent by the federal government on those who don't contribute?

Medicaid reports (as of June 29, 2015) that 48% of all US births are paid for by Medicaid, the welfare health care program for the poor.
https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid-50...men/women.html

70% of them NEVER rise above poverty level.
Only 30% of those born poor ever make it out of poverty

And then they need WIC, CHIP, Food Stamps, Section 8 Housing, Medicaid, etc., etc. ... for life.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by dv1033

Lol. So the first 17 pages are blank or you simply couldn't find anything?

That's where critical thinking skills come into play. The SEC in their own words...

"There is no requirement that a rating agency verify the information contained in RMBS loan portfolios presented to it for rating. Additionally, rating agencies are not required to insist that issuers perform due diligence, and they are not required to obtain reports concerning the level of due diligence performed by issuers.

...The [SEC] Staff notes that each rating agency publicly disclosed that it did not engage in any due diligence or otherwise seek to verify the accuracy or quality of the loan data underlying the RMBS pools they rated during the review period. Each rating agency’s “Code of Conduct” (available on each rating agency’s website) clearly stated that it was under no obligation to perform, and did not perform, due diligence. Each also noted that the assignment of a rating is not a guarantee of the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the information relied on in connection with the rating."

https://www.sec.gov/news/studies/200...tion070808.pdf

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

That's where critical thinking skills come into play. The SEC in their own words...
https://www.sec.gov/news/studies/200...tion070808.pdf

So they were given the option to regulate themselves and they didn't do it because it wasn't required?

Private sector blew it. Deregulation was a failure.

You have this terrible habit of getting stuck on one thing.... It's like you didn't read the first 16 pages outlining what went wrong.

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

How do you explain the $1 trillion spent by the federal government on those who don't contribute?

The same way I've explained numerous times in this forum.

Medicaid reports (as of June 29, 2015) that 48% of all US births are paid for by Medicaid, the welfare health care program for the poor.
https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid-50...men/women.html

70% of them NEVER rise above poverty level.
Only 30% of those born poor ever make it out of poverty

And then they need WIC, CHIP, Food Stamps, Section 8 Housing, Medicaid, etc., etc. ... for life.

Ah, yes...

The taxpayer subsidies that allow powerful influential corporations to pay chickenfeed instead of a living wage.

Just look at it as corporate welfare designed to increase the pay and bonuses of fatcat execs, board members and big stockholders.

Because that's exactly what it is.



All at your expense. Well, you and all the rest of us "little people" who pay taxes.


And they don't even bother to say "thank you."

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by CK78

Yep, the first step is the suspension of private banks creating interest bearing money then have the government issue the money without interest attached.

A very valid point......it will be interesting to see the outcome of the lawsuit currently over F&F remaining entirely in the governments control.

While it is wrong, I can't feel bad for the shareholders currently getting screwed over.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by dv1033

So they were given the option to regulate themselves and they didn't do it because it wasn't required?

They PUBLICLY DISCLOSED EXACTLY what they do and do not do. All UP FRONT.

The problem with that is... what?

Most people would say trusting anyone who tells you up front that they don't check references is idiotic. Let's just say any losses resulting from such is an idiot tax.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

Ah, yes...

The taxpayer subsidies that allow powerful influential corporations to pay chickenfeed instead of a living wage.

Powerful corporations? You might want to rethink that...

Illegals from all over the world run underground economy unlicensed businesses in the U.S., employ illegals while paying no FICA, and pay no federal income tax, etc.

Illegal immigrants' place in the 'underground' economy often reflects culture as well as caution

And guess what? Those employees get free medical care (EMTALA), and their babies get welfare benefits like WIC, CHIP, Food Stamps, Section 8 Housing, Medicaid, etc., etc. ... for life.

Medicaid reports (as of June 29, 2015) that 48% of all US births are paid for by Medicaid, the welfare health care program for the poor.
https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid-50...men/women.html

70% of them NEVER rise above poverty level.
Only 30% of those born poor ever make it out of poverty

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

They PUBLICLY DISCLOSED EXACTLY what they do and do not do. All UP FRONT.

The problem with that is... what?

Most people would say trusting anyone who tells you up front that they don't check references is idiotic. Let's just say any losses resulting from such is an idiot tax.

So it's the investors fault and no one else's?

All you are doing is showing how deregulation didn't work by repeating that same line over and over. That's the point of deregulation.... Not to require the rating agencies to do something and leaving it up to THEM to decide how best to regulate themselves. There's 16 pages of YOUR DOCUMENT that YOU ARE CHOOSING TO IGNORE. Why is that?

It's like you avoiding are how the private rating agencies couldn't do their job properly and even misled investors. Now you are moving the goal posts and blaming the investors.

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by earthlyfather

Time for all the Uncle Tommers to resurface.





The author, of course, Dr Thomas Sowell. Socialism for the Uninformed | RealClearPolitics

Back to the OP. The popularity of socialism in the US in 2016 is merely a response to the rising inequality that's mostly due to globalization and automation. This is essentially history repeating itself 150 years ago during Industrialization.