With all due respect, that's a simple correlation. One of the reasons the 50's were such a good time is the enormous deficit spending that occurred just a few years earlier. Coincidently, private debt was at an all-time low and savings was extremely high. Interest rates at the time reflected the availability of money.Today, debt to income ratios are extremely high, savings is extremely low and deficit spending, with the exception of 2016 fell for 5 straight years (2009-2016).Lastly, the amount banks have to lend has nothing to do with savings.If you wish to raise rates simply too slow down the immoral profit taking banks, there are other less destructive ways to accomplish that goal.
So you have a problem with banks being profitable. Fine, don't use them. "there are other less destructive ways to accomplish that goal." So what we would these be?
Yeah, it's all the bank's fault and never the govt's for over taxation and stifling business growth, noooo, it's the big bad banksters that control our economy. He's another perfect example of a little knowledge is just that, very little knowledge, and never enough to grasp the big picture of an overbearing govt, the very thing our Founders tried to contain via a Republic with three separate branches of govt.
Yep. It is the banks' fault the government made them make loans to people who have proven they would not pay them back.
1. Banks should only be allowed to lend directly to borrowers and then service and keepthose loans on their own balance sheets. 2. US banks should not be allowed to contract in LIBOR3. Banks should not be allowed to have subsidiaries of any kind. 4. Banks should not be allowed to accept financial assets as collateral for loans. 5. US Banks should not be allowed to lend off shore. 6. Banks should not be allowed to buy (or sell) credit default insurance7. Banks should not be allowed to engage in proprietary trading or any profit makingventures beyond basic lending. 8. My last proposal for the banks in this draft is to utilize FDIC approved credit modelsfor evaluation of bank assets.
Why the strawman?I agree, I think the government over taxes. It may come as a surprise to you, but I'm in favor of virtually eliminating all corporate taxes. Taxes on corporations are regressive and penalize businesses for doing business. From a personal tax perspective, I'm not in favor of taxing those with money because they have money. You won't ever find me advocating ideas like "make the rich pay their fair share". That's non-sense. You could take all the wealth away from the top 1% and you'd barely make a dent in "paying for things". Which is precisely why I don't believe that taxes can be used to pay for spending.I never said bankers control the economy. What I said is that private debt is stifling consumption as the number of people seeing their debt rise relative to income increases. That means more and more people are paying debt today for yesterday's productivity leaving less to drive demand.There is an argument to be made for income inequality, but that's not solved by taking money and wealth away from those at the top, but please, let's not distract ourselves from the point of this thread.
Now is as good a time as any. I really have to hear your reasoning for socialism.
First, I'd like to note that you again failed to address my reply, but how do you get socialism from my last reply?
I didn't address your bull shit because it doesn't interest me in any way.Do you honestly believe anyone here takes your beliefs seriously?"There is an argument to be made for income inequality".So make it, and quit pissing around.
I don't care what you think I believe or take seriously, what matters is the arguments you can put up to show I'm wrong. So far you've offered very little unless you think you're silly and diversionary accusations of plagiarism count as an argument...lolClearly what you say and what you do are at odds.Taxed, isn't interested as he was in the conversations we were having and he has since chosen not to reply. You, on the other hand, Solar, are very interested despite the fact that you say you are not. Your actions betray your words.Now, please address my point. Where in what I said supports socialism?Now if you'd like to discuss wealth/ income inequality, create a thread and make your case, otherwise I'm not going to derail my own thread as it's not the point. It has however allowed you, once again, to deflect from the statements I've made. Neutral readers will read what I've written and your consistent deflection, name calling, and strawmen as weak an ineffectual and I'm sure they will be curious why you can't address my points despite your conflicting words and actions.
Taxed, isn't interested as he was in the conversations we were having and he has since chosen not to reply. You, on the other hand, Solar, are very interested despite the fact that you say you are not. Your actions betray your words.
I love discussing economics, business, etc., but you don't even have a basic understanding of such topics, so it's more fun for me to watch Solar smack you around like a hooker who didn't come up with his money.E4E, some of us have made money in business and investing. You haven't. To put another way, you literally have the business experience of my 4 year old nephew. As a man in my 40s, I wouldn't be able to handle knowing I was just a drone my entire life, never having the confidence to put my money where my mouth is. You never did that because you don't know how to, and would have no idea where to start. You never did venture into the business world because [insert your excuse here]. There's nothing wrong with that, but don't pretend you know more about doing than those of us who have done.If you want to safely gain some experience, maybe start small, like a lemonade stand. It would be low risk, so you wouldn't have to cut your dependency on those who actually took risk and started the company you work for, but you'd baby-step into entrepreneurship. The only trick would be to convince your bosses to let you out of work early enough to catch people coming home from work to sell them some lemonade, but you think you're smart, so you should be able to pull that off. Until then, listening to you about economics and business is like taking business advice from the homeless man in back of the gas station. If you could do, you would have done, so until then, keep telling your wife how you coulda' woulda' and your kids who are jealous of their friends who have daddies who were man enough to venture out and become successful business owners. I'm glad you acquired enough of a skill to provide for your family, but don't pretend you have any insight beyond that, because you don't. Instead, know your place and continue to be envious of people like us who are self sufficient.Now go play son, because you're not in my league.