Can someone please show me an example of when un-regulated financial markets actually worked?

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Dude we have moved well beyond that topic in this thread and onto your mental state. Try to keep up.

*waits for Phokus to produce psychiatric documents proving his sanity*

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Phokus
Sure, just link to this thread as well, so people know the context

Wait... you want to INCREASE the odds that others will see this thread? Seriously?

You might want to reconsider.

Originally posted by: Phokus
jbourne ownage, irony, and lack of reading comprehension all rolled into one. It's beautiful.

:lips:

Keep telling yourself that. You know, if you post it enough it might come true!!!

Of course it has, besides this

Originally posted by: jbourne77
The informed are wary of regulation for a reason, because we've learned from it:

UCLA Economists Determine FDR Prolonged GD by 7 Years
Cliffs notes for the above, interpreted by businessandmedia.org

http://www.econ.wisc.edu/works...Eggertsson%20paper.pdf

Can government policies that increase the monopoly power of firms and the militancy of unions increase output? . . . these policies are expansionary when certain "emergency" conditions apply. These emergency conditions - zero interest rates and deflation - were satisfied during the Great Depression in the United States. Therefore, the New Deal, which facilitated monopolies and union militancy, was expansionary . . .

This conclusion is contrary to the one reached by a large previous literature, . . . that argues that the New Deal was contractionary. The main reason for this divergence is that the current model incorporates nominal frictions so that inflation expectations play a central role in the analysis. The New Deal has a strong effect on inflation expectations in the model, changing excessive deflation to modest inflation, thereby lowering real interest rates and stimulating spending.

You can't even live up to your word and GTFO of this thread

Every participation in a thread requires an end. Here's mine:

Like i said, i own your soul :laugh:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
This thread has become the toilet for all of the Phokus threads that would have been today. Techs actually performed a public service.

Oh yeah definately. It is like playtime for Phokus in this thread. So preoccupied he cant create trash thread after trash thread.

 

[JSt0rm]

I haven't read through the thread but did anyone give an example?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
I haven't read through the thread but did anyone give an example?

ummm this thread in a nut shell

did to!!
did not!!!
did to!!!
did not!!!

Got it?

 

[Rangoric]

Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

Because jbourne is intellectually lazy and an idiot. Nowhere does he actually debate the numbers. he just says 'it's anecdotal' because he has nothing to argue.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

Those rates were coming off a crash and were they real or inflated by govt spending policy? In 37 when FDR cut back govt expenditures in the economy, the economy tanked and subsequently we had a recession within the depression.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
I haven't read through the thread but did anyone give an example?

Originally posted by: Mursilis
Before you break your arm so smugly patting yourself on your back, maybe you ought to show that an un-regulated financial market has ever actually existed.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

I absolutely threw it out... I wasn't going to go on a data hunt just to refute his weak implications. In his mind, he discredited the study with that. In my mind, he didn't even come close, so I didn't bother with it. Had he actually tried to make a point with it, there would have been something to sink one's teeth into. Again, that was just him trying to act like a moving target and not get painted into a corner.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

Those rates were coming off a crash and were they real or inflated by govt spending policy? In 37 when FDR cut back govt expenditures in the economy, the economy tanked and subsequently we had a recession within the depression.

Haha, 'tanked', you mean like the great depression? Look how the gdp went up again right after.

http://www.housingbubblebust.com/GDP/Depression.html

These are some of the highest sustained growth rates in US history.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
I haven't read through the thread but did anyone give an example?

Originally posted by: Mursilis
Before you break your arm so smugly patting yourself on your back, maybe you ought to show that an un-regulated financial market has ever actually existed.

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

He never used it to construct an actual point. He basically implied that they fudged the numbers, and therefore expected to discredit the entire study on those grounds. No one took the bait, so he got pissy.

*yawn*, besides being intellectually lazy, you are a liar, what the numbers showed was for their theory to work, GDP growth over a 4 year period under their 'FDR-less' model would have had to have been 11% higher than the greatest 4 year GDP growth in US history. This is why you are worthless.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

Those rates were coming off a crash and were they real or inflated by govt spending policy? In 37 when FDR cut back govt expenditures in the economy, the economy tanked and subsequently we had a recession within the depression.

Haha, 'tanked', you mean like the great depression? Look how the gdp went up again right after.

http://www.housingbubblebust.com/GDP/Depression.html

These are some of the highest sustained growth rates in US history.

You have no idea what are you talking about do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession_of_1937


Now try this, look at your graph. You see the part where it dips? Note the year where it starts to dip.

This is hard stuff I know!

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

I absolutely threw it out... I wasn't going to go on a data hunt just to refute his weak implications. In his mind, he discredited the study with that. In my mind, he didn't even come close, so I didn't bother with it. Had he actually tried to make a point with it, there would have been something to sink one's teeth into. Again, that was just him trying to act like a moving target and not get painted into a corner.

Awww, Genx and jbourne can't even agree

Yes, GenX, jbourne did throw it out, because he's intellectually lazy, has bad reading comprehension, and seems like he does bad with numbers (despite being a 'numbers guy') LOL, owned.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

I absolutely threw it out... I wasn't going to go on a data hunt just to refute his weak implications. In his mind, he discredited the study with that. In my mind, he didn't even come close, so I didn't bother with it. Had he actually tried to make a point with it, there would have been something to sink one's teeth into. Again, that was just him trying to act like a moving target and not get painted into a corner.

I stand corrected.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

Those rates were coming off a crash and were they real or inflated by govt spending policy? In 37 when FDR cut back govt expenditures in the economy, the economy tanked and subsequently we had a recession within the depression.

Haha, 'tanked', you mean like the great depression? Look how the gdp went up again right after.

http://www.housingbubblebust.com/GDP/Depression.html

These are some of the highest sustained growth rates in US history.

Phokus doesn't know that gov't spending is a component in the GDP. I tried helping him with that, but he was too busy informing me how much of a 'retard' I was and how he was 'pwnzing my soul'.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

I absolutely threw it out... I wasn't going to go on a data hunt just to refute his weak implications. In his mind, he discredited the study with that. In my mind, he didn't even come close, so I didn't bother with it. Had he actually tried to make a point with it, there would have been something to sink one's teeth into. Again, that was just him trying to act like a moving target and not get painted into a corner.

Awww, Genx and jbourne can't even agree

Yes, GenX, jbourne did throw it out, because he's intellectually lazy, has bad reading comprehension, and seems like he does bad with numbers (despite being a 'numbers guy') LOL, owned.

That's not disagreement, that's me being 110% unapologetic for not entertaining your hack notions of a credible study.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Genx87

I stand corrected.

You should just put that in your sig because you stand corrected pretty much 100% of the time.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Phokus doesn't know that gov't spending is a component in the GDP. I tried helping him with that, but he was too busy informing me how much of a 'retard' I was and how he was 'pwnzing my soul'.

Well pwnzing souls is hard work.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Phokus doesn't know that gov't spending is a component in the GDP. I tried helping him with that, but he was too busy informing me how much of a 'retard' I was and how he was 'pwnzing my soul'.

Well pwnzing souls is hard work.

I like how he has to tell everyone how worthless they are, how retarded they are, how pwnd they are... because if he didn't keep reminding them, maybe they'd forget :laugh:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Phokus doesn't know that gov't spending is a component in the GDP. I tried helping him with that, but he was too busy informing me how much of a 'retard' I was and how he was 'pwnzing my soul'.

Well pwnzing souls is hard work.

I like how he has to tell everyone how worthless they are, how retarded they are, how pwnd they are... because if he didn't keep reminding them, maybe they'd forget :laugh:

He is looking out for us, a real compassionate troll that Phokus! lol

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Rangoric
Um just because I found it a curious number. Why is the GDP info Phokus mentioned anecdotal and therefore just tossed out?

Might seem odd but I am curious as to why it got thrown out so easily.

I dont believe anybody tossed it out did they? I for one addressed it before he lost his mind and tossed a temper tantrum towing the line about black and white.

Those rates were coming off a crash and were they real or inflated by govt spending policy? In 37 when FDR cut back govt expenditures in the economy, the economy tanked and subsequently we had a recession within the depression.

Haha, 'tanked', you mean like the great depression? Look how the gdp went up again right after.

http://www.housingbubblebust.com/GDP/Depression.html

These are some of the highest sustained growth rates in US history.

Phokus doesn't know that gov't spending is a component in the GDP. I tried helping him with that, but he was too busy informing me how much of a 'retard' I was and how he was 'pwnzing my soul'.

No, you ASSUME i don't know that government spending isn't part of GDP, just like you ASSUMED the quotes i constantly make comparing your UCLA study and my fed reserve study was about which is right, rather than showing how you were ignorant about the very subject you thought you were 'learned' about. I don't even know where you got the former from. But then again, reading comprehension, etc. etc.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Phokus doesn't know that gov't spending is a component in the GDP. I tried helping him with that, but he was too busy informing me how much of a 'retard' I was and how he was 'pwnzing my soul'.

Well pwnzing souls is hard work.

I like how he has to tell everyone how worthless they are, how retarded they are, how pwnd they are... because if he didn't keep reminding them, maybe they'd forget :laugh:

Because you do forget

Every participation in a thread requires an end. Here's mine:

:laugh:

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: techs
Yep. As I expected no one can show me an example of when un-regulated financial markets actually worked.
Ok, mod. You can lock this thread. My point was proven.

I believe you (and others perhaps) have been asked to provide an example of an unregulated financial market. You have not done so.

I can't think of any unregulated financial market, seems to me they've all been regulated in some way - some poorly regulated and others better regulated.

Do you have any examples of unregulated financial markets? If not the question is a ridiculous one and lacks any meaning or significance. If there is no example of any unregulated financial market whatsoever, there certainly cannot be an example of a successful one. (I might as well challenge you to name an example of an unsuccessful unregulated finacial market, and when you cannot claim that as proof that unregulated finacial markets are are always successful and thus superior to regulated ones)

Fern

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Every participation in a thread requires an end. Here's mine:

:laugh:

OH ZING! You got me! I was going to leave the thread, then didn't. POW! You've quoted it so many times now that I'm starting to think you believe it bears some significance. :roll:

You need a hobby son; something from which you can derive personal satisfaction and a sense of accomplishment... because it's quite apparent that you have a lot riding on your "ownage" on this forum. If you weren't such a troll, I'd feel sorry for you .