Anyone Attend an Atlanta "Tea Party"? (house, wage)

[onemanarmy]

Originally Posted by AtlDad

The government of a capitalistic society should make sure that every has the same opportunity to succeed. That is, everyone starts from the same spot. Where you end up is left to the individual.

The goverment in a solialistic society wants it so that everyone ends up in the same place. They don't necessarily care how you get there or where you start from as long as you have all of the same things at the end of the day.

You are correct that Western Europe is a mix of capitalism but to say capitalism has failed is incorrect.

I agree with the principles of your arguement, however no one has the same opportunity if there is legacy wealth. So just like in the Marixt doctrine there can be no inheritance, other wise there will be no fair start to life. Society is better off with no legacy wealth, because that would be the truest form of competition.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by suprascooby22

So broad attacks on the attendees of these tea party's are OK? Your reply was very clear on how you feel about the folks attending the teaparty's but the other moderator Bob Kovacs was far more harsh. More of the PC police at work I guess, do you guys have a moderator on here with a differing viewpoint than yours or Bob's or is this CNN??

My comments were harsh? If you consider my comments to be harsh, you really need to grow a thicker skin......

[Mishap]

Originally Posted by AtlDad

You are right that Lehman did not write mortgages directly but they certainly did have exposure to those mortgages. If the mortgages did not go bad, would the CDS market have even have been a problem?

Yes they absolutely would have failed sooner or later because the lack of regulation meant that Triple A rated companies like AIG were able to write CDS's w/o having any actual cash in reserve to cover it should it go bad. It didn't matter if the counterparty was making bets on T-Bills, any calamity in credit ratings could set off collateral requirements. That's what blew up AIG. The contracts essentially stated AIG would have to hand over cash as collateral should they get downgraded which is counter intuitive since they only get downgraded when they don't have cash.

Subprime mortgages didn't help the situation b/c when packaged into CDO's they often got written down very quickly once it was clear people were defaulting. They weren't the sole part of the problem though b/c even Triple A rated CDO's chock full of prime mortgages lost lots of value when the market turned. In a pre-deregulation world these write downs would have fallen on the banks' balance sheet and banks w/ too many would have closed shop. CDS's instead gave these companies an out and someone else would have to pay up. Since it was wholly deregulated unlike auto/casualty insurance, there was nothing keeping a bank who held a ton of CDO's(with lots of policies from other companies) from writing some CDS's on the side to make some cash w/o ever holding enough capital to actually pay out if someone called in their chit.

If you read up on David Li's Gaussian Copula (the formula that allowed the formation of CDO's), you realize it was based solely on correlation of CDS's and not anything in the fundamental housing market b/c that's simply an intractable problem. When the market turned, correlations were off, and Triple A bonds performed worse than junk the entire concept of mortgage backed securities effectively collapsed which set off a storm of these swaps.

Even more obnoxious was the fact that foreign banks were allowed to count CDO's as capital instead of physical cash in hand. These banks were levered an average 30:1 meaning a 3% drop would wipe them out and the CDS would have to pay out preserving their capital. Deutsche Bank was at 50:1 and the Lehman bankruptcy buyer, Barclays, hit 60:1. If you recall Bear Stearns blew up at 35:1 which was high risk compared to other US banks. AIG played big in this field and that's why Soc Gen, et al all got paid up by the gov't bailout.

Ever since our Georgia Native Son Phil Gramm explicitly deregulated CDS's as well as pushed through Gramm-Bailey that allowed Citi to become a financial supermarket we've been on this Titanic maiden voyage.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by suprascooby22

So you can call attendee's of the tea party's "pathetic" and "yahoo's" and Atlantagreg makes the absurb statement about the attendees wives and children being at home doing obscene things yet as Moderators you get to call us out and have the nerve to say some comments have crossed over into personal attacks. Pretty hypocritical seeing as how you both obviously lean left politically and have NO problem denigrating the attendee's of these tea parties. Harsh no, I should have said hypocritical!

a) I've called no one out
b) I haven't mentioned anything about personal attacks
c) There's a big difference between my comments regarding a group, and some of the direct, person-to-person comments/attacks that occur in some of these threads. I haven't personally seen any in this thread that I'd call attention to, but I'm assuming that Greg saw something that prompted his statement.
d) I don't really tend to lean one way or the other- I see merit in some of what both parties think, and I'm not a sheep that follows blindly wherever the party may lead. I do, however, stand by my statement that these parties are a complete and utter waste of effort, since there is no plan of action going forward to further whatever "cause" the protesters think they're following.

What, if anything, do you think was accomplished by yesterday's demonstrations, and what effect did it have, if any, on future policies/decisions? All I saw was a group of folks waving signs and protesting against policies that were put in place by previous administrations, as if the new administration was supposed to have the whole mess corrected already.

[Randy323]

What the tea party demonstrators would like to see happen in the days, weeks and months to follow is for the federal government to get its SPENDING under control. Yes we need some level of emergency stimulous spending, but the congress brought a cluster bomb to a knife fight! Did you read the sign at the rally that some teenager was holding. "I'm 15 and I already owe $36,543 in taxes" This is generational theft that's taking place right now, and the disgusting part of it is a huge chunk of the spending is earmark spending on politically motivated projects to get officials re-elected.

[gaflsc]

Originally Posted by Randy323

What the tea party demonstrators would like to see happen in the days, weeks and months to follow is for the federal government to get its SPENDING under control. Yes we need some level of emergency stimulous spending, but the congress brought a cluster bomb to a knife fight! Did you read the sign at the rally that some teenager was holding. "I'm 15 and I already owe $36,543 in taxes" This is generational theft that's taking place right now, and the disgusting part of it is a huge chunk of the spending is earmark spending on politically motivated projects to get officials re-elected.

radical.

[Randy323]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

I do, however, stand by my statement that these parties are a complete and utter waste of effort, since there is no plan of action going forward to further whatever "cause" the protesters think they're following.

What, if anything, do you think was accomplished by yesterday's demonstrations, and what effect did it have, if any, on future policies/decisions? .

When a gay activist group demonstrates do you expect immediate policy action? When Pro choice groups demonstate do you expect immediate action? Demonstration have their impact especially when the media does its job and reports on them. Cindy whatsher name camped out at George Bush's personal residence with waving signs and so do throngs of media. Did her actions EVENTUALLY have an effect. Obama (and his anti-war rhetoric) could be the benefactor of her camp out don't you agree?

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by Randy323

When a gay activist group demonstrates do you expect immediate policy action? When Pro choice groups demonstate do you expect immediate action? Demonstration have their impact especially when the media does its job and reports on them. Cindy whatsher name camped out at George Bush's personal residence with waving signs and so do throngs of media. Did her actions EVENTUALLY have an effect. Obama (and his anti-war rhetoric) could be the benefactor of her camp out don't you agree?

The difference is, those groups have a specific policy/action/change in mind, and they have a unified message. I'd bet that if you asked 100 of yesterday's protesters why they where there and what they expected to accomplish, you'd get at least a dozen different responses, and probably have 20 or so who couldn't even give you a reasonably intelligent response.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by Randy323

the disgusting part of it is a huge chunk of the spending is earmark spending on politically motivated projects to get officials re-elected.

Like what?

[onemanarmy]

Originally Posted by Randy323

When a gay activist group demonstrates do you expect immediate policy action? When Pro choice groups demonstate do you expect immediate action? Demonstration have their impact especially when the media does its job and reports on them. Cindy whatsher name camped out at George Bush's personal residence with waving signs and so do throngs of media. Did her actions EVENTUALLY have an effect. Obama (and his anti-war rhetoric) could be the benefactor of her camp out don't you agree?

Apples to Oranges comparison.

Gay rights, pro choice, pro life, etc.. are all civil rights issues that were started from the grounds up. They didnt pop of the air in 2 weeks by a radio personality, lobbyist, and Fox News. Cindy Sheehan had a personal cause that turn into a national spectrum covered by all, and she took her fair share of criticism, but it wasn't a civil cause it was personal. You comparison are all over the place.