Some people may not understand how much damage your president is doing to our country

His latest blunders have not just fucked the US economy ( dow lost 3% yesterday, 401k took a big hit as I near retirement -  recession right around the corner - only took the asshole 3 years to ruin a rising obama economy ), he's taking the world's economy's with it.

Could be the WORST repub prez evah.Everything he touches turns to shit

The fucking megalomaniac dipshit is the whirling dervish of disaster.

Oh yeah he's the worst prez evah, big shame on any supporters

Some people do not understand the harm they are doing to the country when they pursue false allegations of "collusion" in order to overturn a valid election.

Cmon Thom, tell us what you admire in Trump. I know you won't. But what about blah, blah, blah. Your guy sucks. He puts children in cages. 

S&P futures up big today. Did anyone buy on yesterday's dip?

Thom should try reading the Mueller report instead of the Nazi Review.

<< classless motherfucking stupid asshole that is ,,,,,   

his base

I bought some SLV and SH to hedge, but i'll suffer a loss with today's upswing. might be a dead cat bounce though. i remain bullish on metals, and watching for next move on cryptos. will keep y'all posted

Thom is one of those last rats that refuse to notice his ship is sinking -

-  the ship he thought was a yacht but is really a garbage scow. 

tnm - got a couple hot stocks, good for you I wish you luck,  but  you're touting a market that's as unstable as your crosseyed cat.  S + P will need 2 weeks to recover just what it lost yesterday, if it does at all. Thanks to this asshole's disastrous trade policys the skiddish world markets are slowing to a crawl and we're right behind. 

Coming from a dairy farm upbringing it breaks my heart to see what this administration has done to farmers in every state. As world markets slow it makes the hurt on them from his tariffs 10 fold. Everything he touches, bad to fucking worse -- take the collusion blinders off and OPEN YOUR EYES Thom

Bill Clinton's policies of making home loans accessible to unqualified applicants resulted in Wall St creating collateralized debt products to sell to investors seeking greater risk/reward profiles, and banks seeking to limit risk of sketchy mortgages. This directly led to the financial crisis in '08. Obamas Justice Department covered for the Wall St scumbags that took on too much risk and lost, and passed along the cost to the American people via quantitative easing (buying junk debt onto feds balance sheet) and pushing interest rates to artificial levels. Whereas the average investor lost their shirt in '08, the fat cats were flush with cheap capital to buy up the assets for pennies on the dollar. The average person hoping to get a decent rate on their savings was fucked, forcing them into the market at inflated prices. It was the biggest transfer of wealth ever.

What's going on today pales in comparison. I for one would love us to move away from crappy Chinese goods that pollute the planet. Unfortunately Kissinger put us in a bad situation where wer are in a co-dependent relationship with China, whereby they finance our spending (i.e. buying U.S. Treasuries) in echange for us buying their shit.

>>>>Could be the WORST repub prez evah

Warren G. Harding was really bad, especially if you consider how he launched the trifecta of awfulness - Harding>Coolidge>Hoover.   

George W Bush was worse when it comes to foreign policy.

But Trump still has 17 months to fuck up things even more.

<George W Bush was worse when it comes to foreign policy.>

W didn't run shit. You do know that, right?

he is giving me an ulcer

Who is he going to blame when the economy bubble bursts???

<Who is he going to blame when the economy bubble bursts???>

The federal reserve

Lassen....

Are you blaming the housing bubble on the the CRA?

Also, what is artificial about interest rates?

PS....if investors moved from bonds to stocks, they made a LOT of money....did you somehow miss that part?

Are you saying that making loans available to unqualified applicants did not result in Wall St banks shifting risk by creating collateralized products based on mortgages?

So to summarize tnm, your skinny on todays state of affairs is to lay the blame with Clinton Obama + Kissinger.  Wow, just wow.

Do you consider this administration responsible for any of the fucked policys its adopted ? Any amount of regret for any policy at all ? How about proud of a policy ? Any policy.  Please be specific -- tnm + thom + jr + whoever,, step up and be heard 

^ so, it sounds like you want to capitulate to the communist regime in China, and not protect American workers/industry. Wow, Just wow

Who is tnm? I answered a question addressed to that person. not sure who that is/. carry on

<<< not protect American workers/industry. >>>

Please my man how can you possibly fall for that trump tagline ? You're smarter than that. Factories are closing, factories that he and pence promised are not opening. His tariffs are a major reason why.  The dow, which is manufacturing is tanking as we speak. Puleeeeze dude

Sorry but trouble no more is too much to type

The stock market has been overvalued for a long time as far as i'm concerned. We've been due for a correction for quite some time. You should prepare to jump in after the market corrects.

>>>  W didn’t Trump doesn’t run shit. You do know that, right? 

FTFY

And the factories ? Workers ? They overvalued too ?

Please address previous question on policy loyalty, mr skirt the issue.

^ True TOD. Now we are getting somewhere. Who is runnin this bitch then?

^^ sorry, please re-state your policy question

And it's nice to have a productive dialog with y'all. We all have strong opinions, and while everyone is confident there's is the correct one, that may not be the case. Same applies to me- i can readily admit that.

Is it the cutting funding for green energy projects while expanding funding for oil drilling off pristine Alaska and the west/east coast states ; and fracking for gas that kills rivers and streams and ruins water supplies  ? Had to right, wind turbines cause cancer. Seeiously do you not care about Mother Earth ? Didn't you ever listen to NRPS Garden Of Eden ? 

And while you're lookin this'a way at collusion, that'a way chumps policys just from last week alone - look what they did to gut the Endangered Species Act. Hey fuck wildlife right ? What did it ever do for you ?  Also last week they decided the coral reefs around Florida were doing just fine and no longer needed federal protection. Opening it up for, can you guess it ? That's right, more fucking oil drilling. No chance of accidents or hurting manatees and pelicans, we know what we're doing now, right ?

Seriously, what makes you support them exactly ?   

And yeah a good back n forth is good for the -- sumthin , but uts funny, whenever i spend time with others who aren't like me (different religion, race etc) I always seem to learn something of value. Whenever I coexist with a trumper I can feel myself getting dumber 

^ who is this in reference to specifically?

Still waiting for answers to three pretty simple questions:

1)  Are you blaming the housing bubble on the CRA?

2)  Also, what is artificial about interest rates?

 You stated that "The average person hoping to get a decent rate on their savings was fucked, forcing them into the market at inflated prices. It was the biggest transfer of wealth ever."

3)   ....if investors moved from bonds to stocks, they made a LOT of money....did you somehow miss that part?

1) yes, i believe CRA played a large part

2) the fed manipulated interest rates instead of letting the market determine rates

3) you assume average americans, particularly older americans on fixed incomes owned bonds.   

1) yes, i believe CRA played a large part

2) the fed manipulated interest rates instead of letting the market determine rates

3) you assume average americans, particularly older americans on fixed incomes owned bonds.   

weirdsteve, do you believe the fed has done a good or bad job of maintaining the purchasing power of the dollar?

Does Russia control the US?

NO, IS TRUMP

Write it backwards.

PMURT SI ON

Delete every other letter

P  U  T  I  N

far out.. 

Trump victory speech in reverse. I'm searching for references to Satan. They must be in there somewhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6V4h_E8eyA

Lassen, I'm trying to shed light here, no intentional snark.

1) yes, i believe CRA played a large part.

The CRA dates from 1977 (Not Clinton).  How did a 1997 law create a bubble in 2003?

In reality, The bubble pretty much started when the Bush admin deregulated bank lending in 2003.

e.g.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/22/AR200811...

In the summer of 2003, leaders of the four federal agencies that oversee the banking industry gathered to highlight the Bush administration's commitment to reducing regulation. They posed for photographers behind a stack of papers wrapped in red tape. The others held garden shears. Gilleran, who succeeded Seidman as OTS director in late 2001, hefted a chain saw.

Gilleran was an impassioned advocate of deregulation. He cut a quarter of the agency's 1,200 employees between 2001 and 2004, even though the value of loans and other assets of the firms regulated by OTS increased by half over the same period. The result was a mismatch between a short-handed agency and a burgeoning thrift industry.

...

 And indeed, the data (facts) show that the bubble began after Clinton left office.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CSUSHPINSA#0

2) the fed manipulated interest rates instead of letting the market determine rates

Which direction do you think rates would have naturally gone if the Fed had not "manipulated"?

Do you think the Fed made a mistake by lowering rates to try to help the economy in 2008-09?  If so, what was the mistake?

Are rates still "manipulated"?   In what way?

Bond prices are set by traders, they can easily go short if they want to.... is the Fed using Mind control to force traders today to buy 30-year bonds yielding 2.01%?

3) you assume average americans, particularly older americans on fixed incomes owned bonds. 

I didn't assume anything, I am responding to your claim that savers were hurt by being forced into the market..

...you wrote:

"The average person hoping to get a decent rate on their savings was fucked, forcing them into the market at inflated prices. It was the biggest transfer of wealth ever."

I am asking if "being forced into the market" in 2009 was a bad thing...I think not, as stock prices surged for the next ten years.  Or did you mean the bond market?

What economic theory says that you don't drop rates in a recession?  (Greenspan in 2001 lowered rates by 600 basis points, in 2009 they dropped by only 500 basis points, despite 2009 being a much more severe recession/financial crisis...the US was losing 800,000 jobs a month in 2009)

Here are 2-year yields:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DGS2

[4] weirdsteve  , do you believe the fed has done a good or bad job of maintaining the purchasing power of the dollar?

The Fed's goal is inflation of 2%.   https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/economy_14400.htm

Given that inflation since 2009 has been - on average - under 2% ), I think the Fed has probably been too tight, if anything.

At any rate, inflation during the past decade is lower than it was for the prior three decades:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=oD57

p.s.  Greenspan lowering rates in 2001 by 600 basis points also had a hell of a lot to do with the housing bubble.

Clinton had the CRA rewritten in 1995 weirdsteve, which loosened the lending standards.  Do you agree or not?

Clinton also repealed Glass Steagall. Are you aware of what that legislation entailed and what affect did that have on risks Wall St was able to take putting the American economy at risk?

Your response about the fed's target inflation of 2% is a deflection of the question. Can you run me a chart of the purchasing power of the dollar since the inception of the fed?

Clinton also signed NAFTA legislation, which favored big corporations at the expense of the American middle class. Do you dispute that?

Thanks!

>>Some people do not understand the harm they are doing to the country when they pursue false allegations of "collusion" in order to overturn a valid election.<<

Trump 62,984,828

Clinton 65,853,514

Right there’s your validation. Count out loud if it helps you any.

I would prefer Trump be out of office, he is too divisive. i also think if we go into a recession, blaming Trump is dishonest and doesn't reflect the problems that have been building up for decades.

End of the fed mother fuckers

The U.S. needs to control its currency, not a private banking cartel. Sound money, like a gold backed dollar would help, but we've likely gone past the point of no return based on reckless central banking.

Maybe a reset will happen. What will that look like if fiat currencies fail, which they will?

>>>>   Clinton had the CRA rewritten in 1995 weirdsteve, which loosened the lending standards.  Do you agree or not?

Do I agree with your unsupported assertion?

Why would I?

More importantly, how did that matter, if it did happen?

Most importantly...How do you respond to the fact that the housing bubble did not start until  ~2003?

(When Greenspan jacked rates down 600 basis points, and the Bush administration deregulated lending)

(by the way, why did Europe and Asia also have housing bubbles at the same time?...No CRA there?)

>>>>Clinton also repealed Glass Steagall. Are you aware of what that legislation entailed and what affect did that have on risks Wall St was able to take putting the American economy at risk?

Clinton did sign the law given to him by the GOP House & the GOP Senate.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/106th_United_States_Congress

What [a]ffect did that have?

I'm serious, you seem to trying very hard to blame Clinton for the Great Recession.

So how did that repeal of Glass-Steagall cause the Great recession (or whatever you are worked up about)?

>>>Your response about the fed's target inflation of 2% is a deflection of the question. Can you run me a chart of the purchasing power of the dollar since the inception of the fed?

Do you have a point? 

If you do, then why not use some facts to help make your point?

>>>Clinton also signed NAFTA legislation, which favored big corporations at the expense of the American middle class. Do you dispute that?

Clinton did sign NAFTA.

Do you have some evidence that NAFTA hurt the economy?

Any facts you'd like to share?

And Thom shut the fuck up and just fuck off you’re a complete moron asshole sorry for being so direct but God damn you deserve it>>>

FYI:

He is living only about an hour from that infested shit hole known as Baltimore, MD.

Translating infested shit hole from the language of the Repugnant Party's Fuhrer into English>>>Black people live there.

The horror!!

Lassen,

Did the CRA cause housing bubbles all across the World?

How? 

https://www.cbre.com/research-and-reports/ten-years-from-the-last-crash-is-another-global-housing-bubble-underway

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-us-treasury-is-about-to-flood-the-...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/examining-the-big-lie-how-the-facts-of-the-economic-crisis-stack-up/2011/11/16/gIQA7G23cN_story.html

Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up

By Barry Ritholtz

November 19, 2011

...

Consider the causes cited by those who’ve taken up the big lie. Take for example New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s statement that it was Congress that forced banks to make ill-advised loans to people who could not afford them and defaulted in large numbers. He and others claim that caused the crisis. Others have suggested these were to blame: the home mortgage interest deduction, the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, the 1994 Housing and Urban Development memo, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and homeownership targets set by both the Clinton and Bush administrations.

When an economy booms or busts, money gets misspent, assets rise in prices, fortunes are made. Out of all that comes a set of easy-to-discern facts.

Here are key things we know based on data. Together, they present a series of tough hurdles for the big lie proponents.

•The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

A McKinsey Global Institute report noted “from 2000 through 2007, a remarkable run-up in global home prices occurred.” It is highly unlikely that a simultaneous boom and bust everywhere else in the world was caused by one set of factors (ultra-low rates, securitized AAA-rated subprime, derivatives) but had a different set of causes in the United States. Indeed, this might be the biggest obstacle to pushing the false narrative. How did U.S. regulations against redlining in inner cities also cause a boom in Spain, Ireland and Australia? How can we explain the boom occurring in countries that do not have a tax deduction for mortgage interest or government-sponsored enterprises? And why, after nearly a century of mortgage interest deduction in the United States, did it suddenly cause a crisis?

These questions show why proximity and statistical validity are so important. Let’s get more specific.The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 is a favorite boogeyman for some, despite the numbers that so easily disprove it as a cause.It is a statistical invalid argument, as the data show.

For example, if the CRA was to blame, the housing boom would have been in CRA regions; it would have made places such as Harlem and South Philly and Compton and inner Washington the primary locales of the run up and collapse. Further, the default rates in these areas should have been worse than other regions.

What occurred was the exact opposite: The suburbs boomed and busted and went into foreclosure in much greater numbers than inner cities. The tiny suburbs and exurbs of South Florida and California and Las Vegas and Arizona were the big boomtowns, not the low-income regions. The redlined areas the CRA address missed much of the boom; places that busted had nothing to do with the CRA.

The market share of financial institutions that were subject to the CRA has steadily declined since the legislation was passed in 1977. As noted by Abromowitz & Min, CRA-regulated institutions, primarily banks and thrifts, accounted for only 28 percent of all mortgages originated in 2006.

•Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom. Check the mortgage origination data: The vast majority of subprime mortgages — the loans at the heart of the global crisis — were underwritten by unregulated private firms. These were lenders who sold the bulk of their mortgages to Wall Street, not to Fannie or Freddie. Indeed, these firms had no deposits, so they were not under the jurisdiction of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp or the Office of Thrift Supervision. The relative market share of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac dropped from a high of 57 percent of all new mortgage originations in 2003, down to 37 percent as the bubble was developing in 2005-06.

•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards. Taking up that extra share were nonbanks selling mortgages elsewhere, not to the GSEs. Conforming mortgages had rules that were less profitable than the newfangled loans. Private securitizers — competitors of Fannie and Freddie — grew from 10 percent of the market in 2002 to nearly 40 percent in 2006. As a percentage of all mortgage-backed securities, private securitization grew from 23 percent in 2003 to 56 percent in 2006.

These firms had business models that could be called “Lend-in-order-to-sell-to-Wall-Street-securitizers.” They offered all manner of nontraditional mortgages — the 2/28 adjustable rate mortgages, piggy-back loans, negative amortization loans. These defaulted in huge numbers, far more than the regulated mortgage writers did.

Consider a study by McClatchy: It found that more than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending. These private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year. And McClatchy found that out of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006, only one was subject to the usual mortgage laws and regulations.

A 2008 analysis found that the nonbank underwriters made more than 12 million subprime mortgages with a value of nearly $2 trillion. The lenders who made these were exempt from federal regulations.

A study by the Federal Reserve shows that more than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions. The study found that the government-sponsored enterprises were concerned with the loss of market share to these private lenders — Fannie and Freddie were chasing profits, not trying to meet low-income lending goals.

Beyond the overwhelming data that private lenders made the bulk of the subprime loans to low-income borrowers, we still have the proximate cause issue. If we cannot blame housing policies from the 1930s or mortgage tax deductibility from even before that, then what else can we blame? Mass consumerism? Incessant advertising? The post-World War II suburban automobile culture? MTV’s “Cribs”? Just how attenuated must a factor be before fair-minded people are willing to eliminate it as a prime cause?

I recognize all of the above as merely background noise, the wallpaper of our culture. To blame the housing collapse that began in 2006, a recession dated to December 2007 and a market collapse in 2008-09 on policies of the early 20th century is to blame everything — and nothing.

Graphs are always interesting. 

If CRA didn't cause the housing bubble, what did?

More from Barry Ritholz (and yes, Glass-Steagall makes an appearance, Lassen):    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-caused-the-financial-crisis-the-big-lie-goes-viral/2011/10/31/gIQAXlSOqM_story.html

A picture is worth a lot of words sometimes, huh Jaz?

You convinced me, steve.

>>>in order to overturn a valid election.

I don't think that was ever really the end goal of the investigation.

I come back hours later to tnm still bitching about clinton and ducking n dodging all questions put to him this morning. Typical repugnant repub, if ya don't like the questions put to ya, keep changing the subject till it somehow suits your pov. Well you can ignore me if you prefer but I'll gladly address a bit of your most recent nonsense if you don't mind.

<<< End of the fed >>>> 

I gotta wonder here, does an original thought ever pass thru your brain, or are you all trump taglines ? I got news for ya, thats never gonna happen. 

Next

 <<<< The U.S. needs to control its currency >>>> trump purveyor of the worst deficit in us history. I got news for ya, china now controls our currency, chumps tax cuts ballooned our debt to china so high, its made his tariffs laughable to them. Gonna be decades before we get out from under it.

Next

<<<<  a gold backed dollar would help >>> does insanity or mental deficiencies run in your family ??  

I hate to say this but you n thom really are fucking shit fer brains, tnm

<<< End of the fed >>>> 

I gotta wonder here, does an original thought ever pass thru your brain, or are you all trump taglines ? I got news for ya, thats never gonna happen. >>

I've been against the fed well before Trump kiddo. Ask weirdsteve, we've been arguing about it for years. Do you think private central banks buying up trillions of assets and saddling the world with debt is a good thing?

<<<< The U.S. needs to control its currency >>>> trump purveyor of the worst deficit in us history. I got news for ya, china now controls our currency, chumps tax cuts ballooned our debt to china so high, its made his tariffs laughable to them. Gonna be decades before we get out from under it.>>

Was our debt manageable before Trump, and how exactly were we going to pay it off? It was around 20 TRILLION when Trump took office. You do realize that amount of debt can never be paid back, RIGHT? Why are you now concerned about debt? Were you concerned about it before Trump?

<<<<  a gold backed dollar would help >>> does insanity or mental deficiencies run in your family ??  

I hate to say this but you n thom really are fucking shit fer brains, tnm>>

Why are central banks accumulating massive positions in gold if this is such a silly idea?

Oh and thanks for the insult. I won't stoop to your level. I clearly got under you skin, which i'm sorry. I thought you could handle it.

haha!

Anyone have the cajones to buy after last week's 800-point dip? You would've done pretty well.

Glad i own some Target, Inc. (TGT)

Stock Market Rallies, Showing Resilience of Consumers

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/21/business/stock-market-wednesday.html

Looks like President Very Stable Genius wants negative interest rates.

(Does he know that bond yields are set in Auctions?   ...hahahahah I jest)

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1164520903725723648

We need negative rates, like Germany.

(ps. the internet AD big brother people apparently know I like JRAD)

https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-growth-annual

https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status/1164490326549118976