[patb]

[quote=Rt.66]Buy an American car:
Upside= $30,000.00 stays in the US and tons of American jobs are helped.

Downside= If you believe the BS about lower quality then maybe, MAYBE you may have to take time and visit the dealer one or two more times for a warranty repair over a Honda or whatever.

The actual real truth is American cars are crazy, crazy reliable. Too bad so many will still gladly send the $$ from the second largest purchase of thier lives to Japan or Korea over and over in the tiny hopes of gaining a tiny advantage at such an extreem cost to the country and eventually to themselves as well.[/quote]

well in my case, i struggled through that POS the 74 Buick Nova, the POS 78 Olds Diesel and
then the less POS Chevy Cavalier.

I soon found that a toyota corolla was a Cracker box that started, and ran, and as long as you didn’t bang into anything it did great.

And the Camry i had that ran 12 years, decently.

I really wanted a hybrid, i’d have bought a Volt but
i needed a car this summer, and Chevy wasn’t coming out until now.

I wish i had bought the volt

[patb]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR how the heck are we the decision makers in any of this?

Does the govt give you a say? Did you get a vote for GM? Did you even know about other countries the govt helps? Do you even have a clue what orgs the fed or treasury has helped?

Did you have a say in the vote where the GOVT decided to bailout all these rich aholes because the GOVT told us the alternative would be a catastrophic collapse?

Yes I agree with your sarcasm about how well private industry ran things. So the govt didnt have clue what was happening? Or what the outcome would be?

Please tell me how I will be a decision maker as the govt continues to provide more regulation and increases their reach.[/quote]

Hopefully some of that regulation levels the playing field.

Good Regulation means Bridges don’t fall down, which the Nihilist Republican Lt Gov of Minnesota was cheering about as she gavelled in the vote to slash transportation budgets 90% in Minnessota.

Good Regulation means electrical prices are constant through the year, and not subject to market manipulation like Enron did to California.

Good Regulation means the commodity markets are fluid and stable with deep rich pools, not subject to massive swings on the spot markets because one guy is leveraged out 300X on prices like we saw in 08.

Good regulation means my insurance company treats me for cancer after i get sick and while i’ve been paying premiums for 9 years, not deciding that
mole I had removed 7 years ago was actually a metastized liver cancer and thus a preexisting condition and they don’t need to pay my clinic bills.

Good regulation means that the house i buy is built to code and won’t fall down during an earthquake.

so yeah, that’s intrusion, but most of the people
squawking about intrusion are the ones not doing their paperwork and not conforming to the law.

[patb]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR how the heck are we the decision makers in any of this?

Does the govt give you a say? Did you get a vote for GM? Did you even know about other countries the govt helps? Do you even have a clue what orgs the fed or treasury has helped?

Did you have a say in the vote where the GOVT decided to bailout all these rich aholes because the GOVT told us the alternative would be a catastrophic collapse?

Yes I agree with your sarcasm about how well private industry ran things. So the govt didnt have clue what was happening? Or what the outcome would be?

Please tell me how I will be a decision maker as the govt continues to provide more regulation and increases their reach.[/quote]

Hopefully some of that regulation levels the playing field.

Good Regulation means Bridges don’t fall down, which the Nihilist Republican Lt Gov of Minnesota was cheering about as she gavelled in the vote to slash transportation budgets 90% in Minnessota.

Good Regulation means electrical prices are constant through the year, and not subject to market manipulation like Enron did to California.

Good Regulation means the commodity markets are fluid and stable with deep rich pools, not subject to massive swings on the spot markets because one guy is leveraged out 300X on prices like we saw in 08.

Good regulation means my insurance company treats me for cancer after i get sick and while i’ve been paying premiums for 9 years, not deciding that
mole I had removed 7 years ago was actually a metastized liver cancer and thus a preexisting condition and they don’t need to pay my clinic bills.

Good regulation means that the house i buy is built to code and won’t fall down during an earthquake.

so yeah, that’s intrusion, but most of the people
squawking about intrusion are the ones not doing their paperwork and not conforming to the law.

[patb]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR how the heck are we the decision makers in any of this?

Does the govt give you a say? Did you get a vote for GM? Did you even know about other countries the govt helps? Do you even have a clue what orgs the fed or treasury has helped?

Did you have a say in the vote where the GOVT decided to bailout all these rich aholes because the GOVT told us the alternative would be a catastrophic collapse?

Yes I agree with your sarcasm about how well private industry ran things. So the govt didnt have clue what was happening? Or what the outcome would be?

Please tell me how I will be a decision maker as the govt continues to provide more regulation and increases their reach.[/quote]

Hopefully some of that regulation levels the playing field.

Good Regulation means Bridges don’t fall down, which the Nihilist Republican Lt Gov of Minnesota was cheering about as she gavelled in the vote to slash transportation budgets 90% in Minnessota.

Good Regulation means electrical prices are constant through the year, and not subject to market manipulation like Enron did to California.

Good Regulation means the commodity markets are fluid and stable with deep rich pools, not subject to massive swings on the spot markets because one guy is leveraged out 300X on prices like we saw in 08.

Good regulation means my insurance company treats me for cancer after i get sick and while i’ve been paying premiums for 9 years, not deciding that
mole I had removed 7 years ago was actually a metastized liver cancer and thus a preexisting condition and they don’t need to pay my clinic bills.

Good regulation means that the house i buy is built to code and won’t fall down during an earthquake.

so yeah, that’s intrusion, but most of the people
squawking about intrusion are the ones not doing their paperwork and not conforming to the law.

[patb]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR how the heck are we the decision makers in any of this?

Does the govt give you a say? Did you get a vote for GM? Did you even know about other countries the govt helps? Do you even have a clue what orgs the fed or treasury has helped?

Did you have a say in the vote where the GOVT decided to bailout all these rich aholes because the GOVT told us the alternative would be a catastrophic collapse?

Yes I agree with your sarcasm about how well private industry ran things. So the govt didnt have clue what was happening? Or what the outcome would be?

Please tell me how I will be a decision maker as the govt continues to provide more regulation and increases their reach.[/quote]

Hopefully some of that regulation levels the playing field.

Good Regulation means Bridges don’t fall down, which the Nihilist Republican Lt Gov of Minnesota was cheering about as she gavelled in the vote to slash transportation budgets 90% in Minnessota.

Good Regulation means electrical prices are constant through the year, and not subject to market manipulation like Enron did to California.

Good Regulation means the commodity markets are fluid and stable with deep rich pools, not subject to massive swings on the spot markets because one guy is leveraged out 300X on prices like we saw in 08.

Good regulation means my insurance company treats me for cancer after i get sick and while i’ve been paying premiums for 9 years, not deciding that
mole I had removed 7 years ago was actually a metastized liver cancer and thus a preexisting condition and they don’t need to pay my clinic bills.

Good regulation means that the house i buy is built to code and won’t fall down during an earthquake.

so yeah, that’s intrusion, but most of the people
squawking about intrusion are the ones not doing their paperwork and not conforming to the law.

[patb]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR how the heck are we the decision makers in any of this?

Does the govt give you a say? Did you get a vote for GM? Did you even know about other countries the govt helps? Do you even have a clue what orgs the fed or treasury has helped?

Did you have a say in the vote where the GOVT decided to bailout all these rich aholes because the GOVT told us the alternative would be a catastrophic collapse?

Yes I agree with your sarcasm about how well private industry ran things. So the govt didnt have clue what was happening? Or what the outcome would be?

Please tell me how I will be a decision maker as the govt continues to provide more regulation and increases their reach.[/quote]

Hopefully some of that regulation levels the playing field.

Good Regulation means Bridges don’t fall down, which the Nihilist Republican Lt Gov of Minnesota was cheering about as she gavelled in the vote to slash transportation budgets 90% in Minnessota.

Good Regulation means electrical prices are constant through the year, and not subject to market manipulation like Enron did to California.

Good Regulation means the commodity markets are fluid and stable with deep rich pools, not subject to massive swings on the spot markets because one guy is leveraged out 300X on prices like we saw in 08.

Good regulation means my insurance company treats me for cancer after i get sick and while i’ve been paying premiums for 9 years, not deciding that
mole I had removed 7 years ago was actually a metastized liver cancer and thus a preexisting condition and they don’t need to pay my clinic bills.

Good regulation means that the house i buy is built to code and won’t fall down during an earthquake.

so yeah, that’s intrusion, but most of the people
squawking about intrusion are the ones not doing their paperwork and not conforming to the law.

[patb]

[quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]I don’t want to bang on health care. I guess I am just kind of awed by the reach of the govt. When does it stop and where does it end?[/quote]

I stopped worry about the reach of government once I learned that our attack… er, defense… budget is bigger than the rest of the world’s combined.

We send troops overseas against the will of our Constitution by naming our invasions “missions” rather than wars, enabling us to sidestep our checks and balances. Then we use our wonderful Executive branch dictatorship to strongarm other countries into undermining key peace treaties and environmental regulations, so our corporations can profit at the world’s expense.

But you’re right, those pesky social programs that help people are the big problem. As long as we focus on killing them, it’s ok.[/quote]

Commie 🙂

[patb]

[quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]I don’t want to bang on health care. I guess I am just kind of awed by the reach of the govt. When does it stop and where does it end?[/quote]

I stopped worry about the reach of government once I learned that our attack… er, defense… budget is bigger than the rest of the world’s combined.

We send troops overseas against the will of our Constitution by naming our invasions “missions” rather than wars, enabling us to sidestep our checks and balances. Then we use our wonderful Executive branch dictatorship to strongarm other countries into undermining key peace treaties and environmental regulations, so our corporations can profit at the world’s expense.

But you’re right, those pesky social programs that help people are the big problem. As long as we focus on killing them, it’s ok.[/quote]

Commie 🙂

[patb]

[quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]I don’t want to bang on health care. I guess I am just kind of awed by the reach of the govt. When does it stop and where does it end?[/quote]

I stopped worry about the reach of government once I learned that our attack… er, defense… budget is bigger than the rest of the world’s combined.

We send troops overseas against the will of our Constitution by naming our invasions “missions” rather than wars, enabling us to sidestep our checks and balances. Then we use our wonderful Executive branch dictatorship to strongarm other countries into undermining key peace treaties and environmental regulations, so our corporations can profit at the world’s expense.

But you’re right, those pesky social programs that help people are the big problem. As long as we focus on killing them, it’s ok.[/quote]

Commie 🙂

[patb]

[quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]I don’t want to bang on health care. I guess I am just kind of awed by the reach of the govt. When does it stop and where does it end?[/quote]

I stopped worry about the reach of government once I learned that our attack… er, defense… budget is bigger than the rest of the world’s combined.

We send troops overseas against the will of our Constitution by naming our invasions “missions” rather than wars, enabling us to sidestep our checks and balances. Then we use our wonderful Executive branch dictatorship to strongarm other countries into undermining key peace treaties and environmental regulations, so our corporations can profit at the world’s expense.

But you’re right, those pesky social programs that help people are the big problem. As long as we focus on killing them, it’s ok.[/quote]

Commie 🙂

[patb]

[quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]I don’t want to bang on health care. I guess I am just kind of awed by the reach of the govt. When does it stop and where does it end?[/quote]

I stopped worry about the reach of government once I learned that our attack… er, defense… budget is bigger than the rest of the world’s combined.

We send troops overseas against the will of our Constitution by naming our invasions “missions” rather than wars, enabling us to sidestep our checks and balances. Then we use our wonderful Executive branch dictatorship to strongarm other countries into undermining key peace treaties and environmental regulations, so our corporations can profit at the world’s expense.

But you’re right, those pesky social programs that help people are the big problem. As long as we focus on killing them, it’s ok.[/quote]

Commie 🙂

[patb]

[quote=Eugene][quote=patb]

No it means ending Fractional reserve lending.

There is a difference.

All it is is changing the reserve asset ratio for non-federal banks to 1.[/quote]

If the reserve asset ratio is 1, then non-federal banks will be unable to lend out money, because they have to keep all deposits on hand, no?

Or maybe you mean that companies will only be allowed to lend out of their own capital. But then what’s to stop someone from creating a company that pools investor money and lends it out at interest, in essence, making an end run around the “lending against deposits” rule? People want to get interest on their money, the bill explicitly prohibits banks (“depository institutions”) from paying interest on deposits, even if they could, which they can’t because they have to keep 100% of deposits on hand, and there’s no profit in that. So they will organize these makeshift investor pools. How is that better (or different) from the existing fractional reserve lending system?[/quote]

The way i read it, is banks can lend out to the limit of deposits, they can’t multiply.

if a bank has $10 on deposit, they lend out $81 dollars.

under the kucinich plan, if a bank has $10 on deposit they lend out $10.

basically what happens is Bank margins decline.

They go from a spread of 3% on 9X deposits or 27,
down to 3%.

[patb]

[quote=Eugene][quote=patb]

No it means ending Fractional reserve lending.

There is a difference.

All it is is changing the reserve asset ratio for non-federal banks to 1.[/quote]

If the reserve asset ratio is 1, then non-federal banks will be unable to lend out money, because they have to keep all deposits on hand, no?

Or maybe you mean that companies will only be allowed to lend out of their own capital. But then what’s to stop someone from creating a company that pools investor money and lends it out at interest, in essence, making an end run around the “lending against deposits” rule? People want to get interest on their money, the bill explicitly prohibits banks (“depository institutions”) from paying interest on deposits, even if they could, which they can’t because they have to keep 100% of deposits on hand, and there’s no profit in that. So they will organize these makeshift investor pools. How is that better (or different) from the existing fractional reserve lending system?[/quote]

The way i read it, is banks can lend out to the limit of deposits, they can’t multiply.

if a bank has $10 on deposit, they lend out $81 dollars.

under the kucinich plan, if a bank has $10 on deposit they lend out $10.

basically what happens is Bank margins decline.

They go from a spread of 3% on 9X deposits or 27,
down to 3%.

[patb]

[quote=Eugene][quote=patb]

No it means ending Fractional reserve lending.

There is a difference.

All it is is changing the reserve asset ratio for non-federal banks to 1.[/quote]

If the reserve asset ratio is 1, then non-federal banks will be unable to lend out money, because they have to keep all deposits on hand, no?

Or maybe you mean that companies will only be allowed to lend out of their own capital. But then what’s to stop someone from creating a company that pools investor money and lends it out at interest, in essence, making an end run around the “lending against deposits” rule? People want to get interest on their money, the bill explicitly prohibits banks (“depository institutions”) from paying interest on deposits, even if they could, which they can’t because they have to keep 100% of deposits on hand, and there’s no profit in that. So they will organize these makeshift investor pools. How is that better (or different) from the existing fractional reserve lending system?[/quote]

The way i read it, is banks can lend out to the limit of deposits, they can’t multiply.

if a bank has $10 on deposit, they lend out $81 dollars.

under the kucinich plan, if a bank has $10 on deposit they lend out $10.

basically what happens is Bank margins decline.

They go from a spread of 3% on 9X deposits or 27,
down to 3%.

[patb]

[quote=Eugene][quote=patb]

No it means ending Fractional reserve lending.

There is a difference.

All it is is changing the reserve asset ratio for non-federal banks to 1.[/quote]

If the reserve asset ratio is 1, then non-federal banks will be unable to lend out money, because they have to keep all deposits on hand, no?

Or maybe you mean that companies will only be allowed to lend out of their own capital. But then what’s to stop someone from creating a company that pools investor money and lends it out at interest, in essence, making an end run around the “lending against deposits” rule? People want to get interest on their money, the bill explicitly prohibits banks (“depository institutions”) from paying interest on deposits, even if they could, which they can’t because they have to keep 100% of deposits on hand, and there’s no profit in that. So they will organize these makeshift investor pools. How is that better (or different) from the existing fractional reserve lending system?[/quote]

The way i read it, is banks can lend out to the limit of deposits, they can’t multiply.

if a bank has $10 on deposit, they lend out $81 dollars.

under the kucinich plan, if a bank has $10 on deposit they lend out $10.

basically what happens is Bank margins decline.

They go from a spread of 3% on 9X deposits or 27,
down to 3%.

[Author]

Posts