sarsipias1234
Senior member
aa
Last edited:
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Credit card debt the next bubble
Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Even more desperate, obviously, given the projections, assumptions & willful blindness involved in all of that. When faced with unknowns, you just fill in the blanks so as to reinforce what you already believe. When faced with information to the contrary, you simply reject it, carry on as before, hermetically sealed in denial.
Your reference to "those who want to work and those who want to be taken care of" is telling, and shows a disconnect from reality. Current unemployment levels put the lie to your whole notion of how the world works- the vast majority of those currently unemployed were, in fact, working, prior to the final episode in the class warfare wealth extraction mechanism of the Ownership Society. Millions of productive people became unemployed, largely on the basis of luck, on the basis of factors beyond their control. Bear Stearns didn't collapse because all of the little people weren't doing their jobs, at all, and Simmons mattress isn't broke because of that, either. Quite the contrary. Massive unemployment doesn't exist because people are unwilling to work, but rather because business is unwilling to hire.
None of that will penetrate the thinking processes of a guy who's really luckier than he has a right to be, given his cognitive processes are crippled by a defective belief system. From the perspective of the leaders of the Right, that's the beauty of propaganda. People will readily believe in ideas that make them feel good, particularly ones that grant them a sense of moral superiority even when none exists.
TheSlamma
Diamond Member
Heck yeah, it worked for Rome in 410 and France in 1789, starved people with nothing to lose fade out like they were not even there.
sarsipias1234
Senior member
Debt is the slavery of the free
Publilius Syrus quotes (Roman author, 1st century B.C.)
Publilius Syrus quotes (Roman author, 1st century B.C.)
sarsipias1234
Senior member
I say to you never involve yourself in debt, and become no mans surety.
-Andrew Jackson
-Andrew Jackson
sarsipias1234
Senior member
A small debt produces a debtor; a large one, an enemy.
-Publilius Syrus
-Publilius Syrus
OOOoohh! Feel good opinionating, with claims to moral superiority! Label and dismiss, a la Rushbo! Unions Bad! Marxist! Marxist! Marxist! Icky!
When I point out the ontological nature of your arguments, you double down, reassert your beliefs.
Family and friends only, Alkemyst? Really? You renounce any greater sense of community, of shared responsibility & support for your fellow Americans in what really is a time of crisis?
alkemyst
No Lifer
So you are union then, your retorts are dead on and defensive as they should be. I haven't met a union worker that could justify the amounts paid to them other than pulling the 'it wears your body out' one.
We are not a communist nor socialist regime, our people should not be required to provide welfare. I donate a lot mostly to animal causes, that is my choice.
Sadly most union workers make TONS more than most realize and get to live in some if the lowest cost areas of the country. As a whole they are the lowest charity givers of their income demographic and also have more family on welfare as a demographic
Last edited:
Ideology & framing trump reality, huh?
America has been a mixed economy ever since the last time financial capitalism destroyed the economy, back in 1929. The reason it's done so again is because we allowed "deregulated capitalism" too much sway in policy, because too many idiots thought they could stand alone against those forces, and because ever increasing debt has effectively hidden the effects of Reaganomics.
Problem is, the Ownership Society flimflam, which the Right championed quite strongly, has created more debt than than the economy can support, particularly when the economy is contracting. The illusion is fading, as should the kind of thinking that enabled it, thinking like your own.
The insupportable slur in your last paragraph reflects the numerous leaps of faith you've taken throughout this thread, and many others, leaps of faith required to protect the body of lies, the faith, that you hold near & dear.
Look at it a little more closely. Were those college loans guaranteed by the govt? Socialism! You probably wouldn't have obtained them otherwise, and certainly not at as low a rate. Mortgage? Would that be Fannie, Freddie, or the FHA? Socialism! The FHA invented the self amortizing mortgage, and other lenders were forced to follow suit. Any of your senior relatives rely on SS or Medicare? Socialism! Buy USDA inspected meat at the supermarket? Socialism! FDA approved drugs? more of the same.
The list goes on from there...
alkemyst
No Lifer
not sure what you mean...
Not sure what you mean here either on standing alone against the forces...most didn't think that far ahead rather than just get paid. You do realize the time difference between 1929 and "Reagan" I hope.
Right...entitlement. I don't see how you think I think that way. I sacrificed, when my career(s) ebbed, I did personal growth and moved on. I never took anything from the government. Either have my own parents that were laid off about 6 years ago now...10 years prior to when they should have retired.
Again, you are way off base. The first time I went to college I was denied anything more than $2000 in government loans due to my parents income. The problem with that is both my parents were hospitalized at the time and not expected to make it. They look at last year's income though...Anyway, I took out about $5000 more in private loans. Funded my first 5+ years on $7k plus my own money. When I went back to college a second time at 30, I qualified for nothing...I had to take out my own loans at $30k for a little over a year to cover my expenses and state tuition.
Fannie/Freddie/FHA are sort of forced on us now...it's almost impossible to get out of them. My first home loan was a private one through the bank that was bought out 20+ years later by PNC and put my parents out of work. My current home loan is Freddie backed...However, these aren't really socialist in nature...I think you are referring to something else like 105% loans or 0% down....
You are mistaking government for socialism. Sure somethings are socialist by nature, but that's not the main course. As far as I know, none of my family ever had to live off SS/Medicare alone. However, all of them paid into it so that's not really free money.
FDA approved drugs are socialism in the works? wow...that's a stretch!
I am sure it does in the make believe world of Jhhnn.
Last edited:
If you didn't have to put up collateral to borrow the $30K, it was very likely govt backed, even if it came from a private entity. Lenders aren't in the habit of doing so to unemployed people for the purposes of education w/o guarantees. Lots of student loans are structured that way, or were until just recently.
State school? There you are- socialism, supported at least in part by the taxpayers.
While some people end up with incomes beyond SS & medicare in retirement, those programs effectively subsidize the incomes of nearly all seniors. Anybody who receives them is doing so in a socialist manner. Yes, they paid in, to provide those benefits to their own seniors. Only when SS revenues become less than payouts will that cease to be the case. Most seniors would be destitute or nearly so w/o SS.
The reason that the GSE's and the FHA dominate the mortgage industry is because they offer lower rates through govt guarantees to investors. That's regardless of loan specifics. That's socialistic by nature.
Of course the FDA is socialistic. It came into being during the Progressive era over concerns about public safety in the face of patent medicines, many of which were actually harmful, addictive, or completely ineffectual.
Public safety, common good, shared responsibility are all highly socialistic concepts. It was easier for people to understand that when they lived in isolated and more self sufficient communities, but the ideas haven't changed, just the scope. It's harder to accept the needs of others when they're not your immediate neighbors, or even in your own state, but those needs exist just the same. It's even less appealing when those segments of the population are regularly demonized by media figures. Whole areas of the country are subsidized by the taxes of wealthier regions, like this-
http://www-958.ibm.com/software/dat...izations/federal-spending-in-each-state-per-2
It's also a mistake to think of welfare as applying to adults, because the vast majority of recipients are children, directly or indirectly. Children whose families receive assistance at some point in their lives will grow up to work and contribute themselves in the vast majority of instances. It's an investment in the future of America.
On the subject of debt, here's an interesting chart. Notice when debt rises most sharply, which was during the Reagan and GWB years. That wasn't an accident- it was a policy decision, which, coupled with top tier tax cuts, greatly benefited the investor (lender) class.
http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2010/09/charts-of-the-day-the-new-z-1-is-out.html
State school? There you are- socialism, supported at least in part by the taxpayers.
While some people end up with incomes beyond SS & medicare in retirement, those programs effectively subsidize the incomes of nearly all seniors. Anybody who receives them is doing so in a socialist manner. Yes, they paid in, to provide those benefits to their own seniors. Only when SS revenues become less than payouts will that cease to be the case. Most seniors would be destitute or nearly so w/o SS.
The reason that the GSE's and the FHA dominate the mortgage industry is because they offer lower rates through govt guarantees to investors. That's regardless of loan specifics. That's socialistic by nature.
Of course the FDA is socialistic. It came into being during the Progressive era over concerns about public safety in the face of patent medicines, many of which were actually harmful, addictive, or completely ineffectual.
Public safety, common good, shared responsibility are all highly socialistic concepts. It was easier for people to understand that when they lived in isolated and more self sufficient communities, but the ideas haven't changed, just the scope. It's harder to accept the needs of others when they're not your immediate neighbors, or even in your own state, but those needs exist just the same. It's even less appealing when those segments of the population are regularly demonized by media figures. Whole areas of the country are subsidized by the taxes of wealthier regions, like this-
http://www-958.ibm.com/software/dat...izations/federal-spending-in-each-state-per-2
It's also a mistake to think of welfare as applying to adults, because the vast majority of recipients are children, directly or indirectly. Children whose families receive assistance at some point in their lives will grow up to work and contribute themselves in the vast majority of instances. It's an investment in the future of America.
On the subject of debt, here's an interesting chart. Notice when debt rises most sharply, which was during the Reagan and GWB years. That wasn't an accident- it was a policy decision, which, coupled with top tier tax cuts, greatly benefited the investor (lender) class.
http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2010/09/charts-of-the-day-the-new-z-1-is-out.html
sarsipias1234
Senior member
nm
Last edited:
I understand socialism well enough that I don't have to shift the definition when it benefits me vs when it benefits people I might think are my "inferiors".
And you're in error wrt GSE mortgage rates- they are lower, regardless of loan particulars, simply because the govt guarantees payment to investors. As we've seen with the takeover of the GSE's, their bonds are zero risk, and therefore command a premium. Lower risk, lower return for investors, lower rates for homebuyers.
I don't belong in this country? Really?
When you have to resort to that, you're out of arguments, into denial, which is expected behavior from people who believe in things that make them feel good, rather than things that are true.
werepossum
Elite Member
I don't know about now, but when I bought my house (mid 80s) the rates were exactly the same. I only bought via Fannie Mae because my loan officer convinced me it was a more secure loan. It was only years later I realized she meant "more secure for my bank and thus a higher commission and/or bonus for me."
So, uhh, your loan officer took advantage of you somehow? Or the market was anomalous at that moment?
There is zero reason for investors to select private label MBS over US govt guaranteed GSE paper other than greater returns. Zero. Market theory tells us that. Which is not to buy into the whole rational markets idealization other than slightly.
alkemyst
No Lifer
Socialism <> programs that are 'socialist' by design.
GSE's (the new buzzword) came to be due to the investors pulling out and leaving people without lenders.
At the time I got my loan for the first house it was a full 1% lower than anything else out there. Yeah I put more than 20% down, but I was putting that much down regardless. My loan was always owned by the bank I borrowed from and didn't have any other backing.
You really don't belong in this country with your anti-capitalistic sentiment. It's doesn't make me feel good that people like you are out there spreading lies in hopes for a handout.
You have no idea what you're talking about on any level whatsoever.
Handout? I'm not he one benefiting from govt guaranteed student loans or state universities, or govt insured mortgages, either. And I neither want nor have requested handouts of any kind for myself.
Nor am I anti-capitalist. I do recognize, however, that capitalism must operate within imposed constraints if it's to serve us all and if it's to not destroy itself in a paroxysm of greed at the top. I also recognize that the trickledown free market ideology of Repubs has demonstrably failed to do that. Anybody who really thinks otherwise is intellectually snakebit.
I say bring back the aspects of the New Deal that survived WW2, the way of doing things that facilitated the greatest period of growth in our history and the establishment of a broad middle class, a balance of interests where all Americans benefit, not just a few.
KlokWyze
Diamond Member
Do you belong in a country where freedom of speech is a fundamental principle? I see that one of the most common tactics of the right is just to demonize anything and everything that doesn't absolutely agree with them on every possible issue.
Maybe make a counter argument with coherent logic instead of insults?
alkemyst
No Lifer
I tried he doesn't get it, taxes are collected and used for things that benefit the people. That does not make us socialist, he is also the one claiming he is the only one here not using those services.
He knows buzzwords and stuff he has 'heard'.
Heh. Deep from the Bunker O' Denial, more epithets are hurled. Denialists do that a lot- they lash out, push away reason so as to maintain their belief structure.
In your head, any socialist aspect of our system that you use couldn't possibly be socialism, because if it were, then you'd be a socialist, right? And that would be *wrong* per your belief system, so you simply go into denial of the truth, that yes, socialism benefits you personally. It benefits all of us who aren't wealthy, and it even benefits them, too. I merely pointed out the aspects of it that you've admitted are to your direct benefit. I'm not complaining about it at all. When it comes to aspects of the system that benefit others, not you, then *you* rave about it, because in your head you can't admit that you benefit from socialist aspects of our system, because you don't believe in socialism. Round and round in a circle- a self imposed form of Catch-22.
If you were half as smart as you think you are, you wouldn't look for the flaws in what I've offered, but rather at the flaws in what you believe, the things that underlie and shape your thinking.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
