Forum Thread

Derivatives and nuclear weapons.

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 32 1 2 3 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Nuclear weapons and financial derivatives both pose a threat to lives. Derivatives take money away from jobs producing businesses creating low and no wages. Reducing income to the working classes leads to a lowering of the standard of living. Derivatives ultimately reduce risks to businesses just like fire, theft and damage insurance. The problem with derivatives is unregulated trading . Unregulated trading still requires a party and a counter party. Unregulated allows an attractive investment and money naturally follows taking money from the jobs producing economy. An uncapitalized jobs sector results in lower standard of living. The Democratic party should champion the cause for a highly regulated insurance system. Regulating derivatives to insured interests only would allow money back into jobs producing creating prosperity with new jobs. The resulting prosperity would make possible benefits to the working class that are now impossible to pay for. Not taking money from anybody but just allowing an economy to do what it is. Trading in goods and services.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    President Ronald Reagan may have cut the top tax rate from 70 percent to 30 percent, starting the wealth accumulation at the top, but it was President Bill Clinton who deregulated the banks with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) that forced the middle class deeper and deeper into debt and eventually created the great recession.

    Phil Uhrich

    MINNPOST

    minnpost.com

  • Center Left
    Independent
    Central, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Monica, The Clintons are gone and it's you discussing this topic with yourself. Perhaps if you found 3 or 9 (prominent) journalists who were as outraged as you are it might seem more relevant.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ Wrote: Monica, The Clintons are gone and it's you discussing this topic with yourself. Perhaps if you found 3 or 9 (prominent) journalists who were as outraged as you are it might seem more relevant.
    I understand exactly what you are saying. What I don't understand is the total absence in interest in what is destroying the middle class. Don't forget TJ I came on this sight and described in detail what was happening with Trump and why. My October 28th 2016 post described why the polls were wrong and that Trump was set to win the election. DOW at 25000 and almost 0 GDP. That is blatantly obvious. The only response to this thread is you saying to quit bothering the sight. That is blatantly obvious also. But my opinions are memorialized here. That is what is important.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    President Ronald Reagan may have cut the top tax rate from 70 percent to 30 percent, starting the wealth accumulation at the top, but it was President Bill Clinton who deregulated the banks with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) that forced the middle class deeper and deeper into debt and eventually created the great recession.

    Phil Uhrich

    MINNPOST

    minnpost.com

    Your link didn't provide me with Phil Uhrich's article of interest so I dug it out and noticed that he linked to two articles to make his case, one in the Huffington Post, How Congress Rushed a Bill that Helped Bring the Economy to Its Knees, and the other in the Washington Post, Washington’s Invisible Hand. So for the sake of completeness, I have shown the links in Ulrich's article that he cited, and extracted a few paragraphs (Chet style cherry picking).

    With regards to the HP article, Paul Blumenthal heaps the blame on Congress. "In the end, the country would have been better served had Congress not taken the 262-page Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which had trouble passing Congress on its own accord, and inserted it into a bloated 11,000 page conference report when no one was looking. If ever there was a case where Congress should have given more time and listened closer, this was it. Now, we’re all paying for it."

    From the Washington Post article, "in 1999 Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a bank deregulation bill that swept away a Depression-era law known as Glass-Steagall. The new law had such a chorus of bipartisan support that it passed the Senate 90-8".

    "The current financial crisis is frequently called the worst since the Great Depression. And Gramm-Leach-Bliley is often cited as a cause, even by some of its onetime supporters. Yet the criticism is often vague, which means that anyone trying to understand the causal chain — how the end of Glass-Steagall led to the end of Lehman Brothers — will have a hard time doing so. To many banking experts, the reason is simple enough: namely, that the law didn’t really do much to create the current crisis. It is a handy scapegoat, since it’s easily the biggest piece of financial deregulation in recent decades. But one act of deregulation, even a big one, and the absence of other, good regulations aren’t the same thing. The nursemaid of the current crisis isn’t so much what Washington did, in other words, as what it didn’t do."

    "...But surely the bulk of the blame lies with the policy makers and regulators who were on duty while the housing bubble inflated and Wall Street went wild — the Bush administration and Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve. Their near-religious belief in the powers of the market led them to conclude that the mere fact that a company was willing to make an investment made that investment O.K."

    Just adding a little context to Chet's pervasive "Bill Clinton blame game".

    .

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    When I was saying Trump could win and why the sight was hoping Trump would be the candidate because he would be so easy to defeat. The sight could have been world famous with objective thinking .
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    President Ronald Reagan may have cut the top tax rate from 70 percent to 30 percent, starting the wealth accumulation at the top, but it was President Bill Clinton who deregulated the banks with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) that forced the middle class deeper and deeper into debt and eventually created the great recession.

    Phil Uhrich

    MINNPOST

    minnpost.com

    Your link didn't provide me with Phil Uhrich's article of interest so I dug it out and noticed that he linked to two articles to make his case, one in the Huffington Post, How Congress Rushed a Bill that Helped Bring the Economy to Its Knees, and the other in the Washington Post, Washington’s Invisible Hand. So for the sake of completeness, I have shown the links in Ulrich's article that he cited, and extracted a few paragraphs (Chet style cherry picking).

    With regards to the HP article, Paul Blumenthal heaps the blame on Congress. "In the end, the country would have been better served had Congress not taken the 262-page Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which had trouble passing Congress on its own accord, and inserted it into a bloated 11,000 page conference report when no one was looking. If ever there was a case where Congress should have given more time and listened closer, this was it. Now, we’re all paying for it."

    From the Washington Post article, "in 1999 Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a bank deregulation bill that swept away a Depression-era law known as Glass-Steagall. The new law had such a chorus of bipartisan support that it passed the Senate 90-8".

    "The current financial crisis is frequently called the worst since the Great Depression. And Gramm-Leach-Bliley is often cited as a cause, even by some of its onetime supporters. Yet the criticism is often vague, which means that anyone trying to understand the causal chain — how the end of Glass-Steagall led to the end of Lehman Brothers — will have a hard time doing so. To many banking experts, the reason is simple enough: namely, that the law didn’t really do much to create the current crisis. It is a handy scapegoat, since it’s easily the biggest piece of financial deregulation in recent decades. But one act of deregulation, even a big one, and the absence of other, good regulations aren’t the same thing. The nursemaid of the current crisis isn’t so much what Washington did, in other words, as what it didn’t do."

    "...But surely the bulk of the blame lies with the policy makers and regulators who were on duty while the housing bubble inflated and Wall Street went wild — the Bush administration and Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve. Their near-religious belief in the powers of the market led them to conclude that the mere fact that a company was willing to make an investment made that investment O.K."

    Just adding a little context to Chet's pervasive "Bill Clinton blame game".

    .

    Schmidt, Did you once say that some frugal living is necessary to provide for retirement?

    I provided the link didn't I ?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt, The party spent a billion dollars on a campaign to lose to a buffoon and you want to blame me.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    2000 Commodities Act Paved Way For Problems : NPR

    NPR › templates › story › story


    Mar 20, 2009 · Melissa Block talks with Michael Hirsh, senior editor at Newsweek talks about how the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 was passed to keep financial derivatives, including credit default swaps, unregulated. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission failed to rein in the ...

    How Congress Rushed a Bill that Helped Bring the Economy to Its Knees | HuffPost

    Huffington Post › entry


    May 11, 2009 · And now, your case study: the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. ... bill would be viewed only eight years later as part of the failure of our political system

    Hillary Clinton attacked Bernie Sanders for voting for a bill her husband signed ...

    Washington Post › news › 2016/01/18


    Jan 18, 2016 · Ewing introduced his Commodity Futures Modernization Act. While Ewing's bill sailed quickly through the House, it stalled in the Senate, as Sen. Gramm ...

    Bill Clinton: I should have better regulated derivatives - CNN.com

    CNN.com › POLITICS › bill.clinton.qanda


    Feb 16, 2009 · They pointed to your signing of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. I wonder what you think about that. Former President Bill ...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    From the above link about Sanders signing the CFMA

    "Well, the last point on this is, Senator Sanders, you're the only one on this stage that voted to deregulate the financial market in 2000, to take the cops off the street, to use Governor O'Malley's phrase, to make the SEC and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission no longer able to regulate swaps and derivatives, which were one of the main cause of the collapse in '08," Clinton said."

    Schmidt, Hillary said it.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    President Ronald Reagan may have cut the top tax rate from 70 percent to 30 percent, starting the wealth accumulation at the top, but it was President Bill Clinton who deregulated the banks with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) that forced the middle class deeper and deeper into debt and eventually created the great recession.

    Phil Uhrich

    MINNPOST

    minnpost.com

    Your link didn't provide me with Phil Uhrich's article of interest so I dug it out and noticed that he linked to two articles to make his case, one in the Huffington Post, How Congress Rushed a Bill that Helped Bring the Economy to Its Knees, and the other in the Washington Post, Washington’s Invisible Hand. So for the sake of completeness, I have shown the links in Ulrich's article that he cited, and extracted a few paragraphs (Chet style cherry picking).

    With regards to the HP article, Paul Blumenthal heaps the blame on Congress. "In the end, the country would have been better served had Congress not taken the 262-page Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which had trouble passing Congress on its own accord, and inserted it into a bloated 11,000 page conference report when no one was looking. If ever there was a case where Congress should have given more time and listened closer, this was it. Now, we’re all paying for it."

    From the Washington Post article, "in 1999 Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a bank deregulation bill that swept away a Depression-era law known as Glass-Steagall. The new law had such a chorus of bipartisan support that it passed the Senate 90-8".

    "The current financial crisis is frequently called the worst since the Great Depression. And Gramm-Leach-Bliley is often cited as a cause, even by some of its onetime supporters. Yet the criticism is often vague, which means that anyone trying to understand the causal chain — how the end of Glass-Steagall led to the end of Lehman Brothers — will have a hard time doing so. To many banking experts, the reason is simple enough: namely, that the law didn’t really do much to create the current crisis. It is a handy scapegoat, since it’s easily the biggest piece of financial deregulation in recent decades. But one act of deregulation, even a big one, and the absence of other, good regulations aren’t the same thing. The nursemaid of the current crisis isn’t so much what Washington did, in other words, as what it didn’t do."

    "...But surely the bulk of the blame lies with the policy makers and regulators who were on duty while the housing bubble inflated and Wall Street went wild — the Bush administration and Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve. Their near-religious belief in the powers of the market led them to conclude that the mere fact that a company was willing to make an investment made that investment O.K."

    Just adding a little context to Chet's pervasive "Bill Clinton blame game".

    .

    Commodities Futures Trading Commission no longer able to regulate swaps and derivatives, which were one of the main cause of the collapse in '08," Clinton said."

    Hillary said it.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Just adding a little context to Chet's pervasive "Bill Clinton blame game".

    .

    Commodities Futures Trading Commission no longer able to regulate swaps and derivatives, which were one of the main cause of the collapse in '08," Clinton said."

    Hillary said it.

  • Independent
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Deregulated capitalism brought the economy to its knees. Financial innovation brought the economy to its knees.

    Humans are irrational. Tversky and Kahneman (might have misspelled his name) proved that. Richard Thaler built upon their work. Minsky predicted the crash many years after he died because of his stability creates instability hypothesis. Risk cannot be spread out. And companies generally take on more risk the longer good times last.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote:

    Deregulated capitalism brought the economy to its knees. Financial innovation brought the economy to its knees.

    Humans are irrational. Tversky and Kahneman (might have misspelled his name) proved that. Richard Thaler built upon their work. Minsky predicted the crash many years after he died because of his stability creates instability hypothesis. Risk cannot be spread out. And companies generally take on more risk the longer good times last.

    Agreed. Why Schmidt wants to turn everything I say into an attack on the Clintons and the Democratic party is counterproductive . I am calling attention to the fact that the financial situation of the country is out of control . It needs regulation an revelation. DOW at 25000 and almost zero GDP and almost zero startups is a huge warning sign. Its not about the past but going forward. Money needs to be directed into jobs producing investing . Left to itself money will be made the easiest way possible . Derivatives . The financial casino . It only works if somebody continually takes the losing bet. The reason it continues is the losing bets are being made with other peoples money. That has to stop and money needs to be regulated back into financing job producing start ups.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Agreed. Why Schmidt wants to turn everything I say into an attack on the Clintons and the Democratic party is counterproductive . I am calling attention to the fact that the financial situation of the country is out of control . It needs regulation an revelation.

    The reason I (I won't speak for Schmidt) say you attack the Clinton's is because you attack the Clinton's all day, every day.

    We can be having a discussion about whether the sky is blue or light blue and you will turn it into an attack on Bill Clinton for signing financial regulation you didn't like into law. Then you'll blame Hillary for the same thing because she is married to him.

    You know what Chet? Sometimes we want to discuss the color of the sky and not your hatred of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

    Chet Ruminski Wrote: DOW at 25000 and almost zero GDP and almost zero startups is a huge warning sign.

    This is fake news.

    " 7.4% of job seekers in the United States started their own businesses" in 2017.

    I didn't major in mathematics, but I do know that 7.4% is > (almost) 0.0%.

    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Its not about the past but going forward. Money needs to be directed into jobs producing investing . Left to itself money will be made the easiest way possible . Derivatives . The financial casino . It only works if somebody continually takes the losing bet. The reason it continues is the losing bets are being made with other peoples money. That has to stop and money needs to be regulated back into financing job producing start ups.

    Tell that to the people who are investing heavily in startups.

    I honestly don't get you Chet. Should people be able to start up their own companies or should the government run them all?