Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
patientrenter
ParticipantTake a look at the Fed Flow of Funds. Home values in the aggregate exceed bank equity in the aggregate by many, many multiples. Without all the money poured into the housing market by the government in the last 2 years, home prices would be much lower than they are now. The gvt injections may have prevented bank equity from going all the way from a trillion or so down to zero, but they held home values up by many, many trillions above their true (unsupported) value. Homeowners are receiving by far the largest amount of benefit from the govt bailouts. Do the math.
ParticipantTake a look at the Fed Flow of Funds. Home values in the aggregate exceed bank equity in the aggregate by many, many multiples. Without all the money poured into the housing market by the government in the last 2 years, home prices would be much lower than they are now. The gvt injections may have prevented bank equity from going all the way from a trillion or so down to zero, but they held home values up by many, many trillions above their true (unsupported) value. Homeowners are receiving by far the largest amount of benefit from the govt bailouts. Do the math.
ParticipantTake a look at the Fed Flow of Funds. Home values in the aggregate exceed bank equity in the aggregate by many, many multiples. Without all the money poured into the housing market by the government in the last 2 years, home prices would be much lower than they are now. The gvt injections may have prevented bank equity from going all the way from a trillion or so down to zero, but they held home values up by many, many trillions above their true (unsupported) value. Homeowners are receiving by far the largest amount of benefit from the govt bailouts. Do the math.
July 1, 2009 at 7:32 PM in reply to: OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While? #423619Participant[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.
But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.
India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.
[/quote]
It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.
July 1, 2009 at 7:32 PM in reply to: OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While? #423848Participant[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.
But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.
India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.
[/quote]
It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.
July 1, 2009 at 7:32 PM in reply to: OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While? #424129Participant[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.
But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.
India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.
[/quote]
It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.
July 1, 2009 at 7:32 PM in reply to: OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While? #424198Participant[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.
But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.
India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.
[/quote]
It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.
July 1, 2009 at 7:32 PM in reply to: OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While? #424360Participant[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.
But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.
India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.
[/quote]
It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.
Participant“Homeowners don’t have a lobby”. You seem not to be joking, so I suppose you are serious. Homeowners are the main drivers of this entire massive government intervention. They are maybe 3/4 of all voters. Various people wield some power in our political process, but every dollar starts in Congress. Congressmen like a lot of things, but getting re-elected comes first.
Sure, careless investors who loaned too much money to people who were overpaying for homes are also trying to avoid the appropriate consequences, and there are a few hundred thousand of them, and they are mostly wealthy. But the politicians aren’t bailing them out directly – they are aiming to instead keep homes overpriced. That way homeowners get what they want too. Re-election. It’s magical.
Participant“Homeowners don’t have a lobby”. You seem not to be joking, so I suppose you are serious. Homeowners are the main drivers of this entire massive government intervention. They are maybe 3/4 of all voters. Various people wield some power in our political process, but every dollar starts in Congress. Congressmen like a lot of things, but getting re-elected comes first.
Sure, careless investors who loaned too much money to people who were overpaying for homes are also trying to avoid the appropriate consequences, and there are a few hundred thousand of them, and they are mostly wealthy. But the politicians aren’t bailing them out directly – they are aiming to instead keep homes overpriced. That way homeowners get what they want too. Re-election. It’s magical.
Participant“Homeowners don’t have a lobby”. You seem not to be joking, so I suppose you are serious. Homeowners are the main drivers of this entire massive government intervention. They are maybe 3/4 of all voters. Various people wield some power in our political process, but every dollar starts in Congress. Congressmen like a lot of things, but getting re-elected comes first.
Sure, careless investors who loaned too much money to people who were overpaying for homes are also trying to avoid the appropriate consequences, and there are a few hundred thousand of them, and they are mostly wealthy. But the politicians aren’t bailing them out directly – they are aiming to instead keep homes overpriced. That way homeowners get what they want too. Re-election. It’s magical.
Participant“Homeowners don’t have a lobby”. You seem not to be joking, so I suppose you are serious. Homeowners are the main drivers of this entire massive government intervention. They are maybe 3/4 of all voters. Various people wield some power in our political process, but every dollar starts in Congress. Congressmen like a lot of things, but getting re-elected comes first.
Sure, careless investors who loaned too much money to people who were overpaying for homes are also trying to avoid the appropriate consequences, and there are a few hundred thousand of them, and they are mostly wealthy. But the politicians aren’t bailing them out directly – they are aiming to instead keep homes overpriced. That way homeowners get what they want too. Re-election. It’s magical.
Participant“Homeowners don’t have a lobby”. You seem not to be joking, so I suppose you are serious. Homeowners are the main drivers of this entire massive government intervention. They are maybe 3/4 of all voters. Various people wield some power in our political process, but every dollar starts in Congress. Congressmen like a lot of things, but getting re-elected comes first.
Sure, careless investors who loaned too much money to people who were overpaying for homes are also trying to avoid the appropriate consequences, and there are a few hundred thousand of them, and they are mostly wealthy. But the politicians aren’t bailing them out directly – they are aiming to instead keep homes overpriced. That way homeowners get what they want too. Re-election. It’s magical.
July 1, 2009 at 6:57 PM in reply to: OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While? #424113Participant[quote=air_ogi]Yes, how dare I discriminate based on scientific credentials. Maybe we should ask Rush Limbaugh for his opinion.
China produces 1/3 of CO2 per capita US. India produces 1/10 of CO2 per capita as US.
EU introduced cap and trade in 2005 and had reduction in unemployment by 21% (from 8.9% to 7%) by 2008. I am not claiming that it was due to cap and trade, but your claim that cap and trade is economy destroyer is not grounded in fact. [/quote]
air_ogi, let’s suppose a country with a population of 100 people is confronted with two alternatives:
1. Produce 10 times as much pollution per capita as the USA, or
2. Produce 1/10 as much pollution per capita as the USA
Does it matter much for the world at large what that country does?
Of course not. It is interesting to note the per capita numbers, but what really matters is the total amount of pollution.
-
AuthorPosts
