Page 73 of 98 FirstFirst ... 2363717273747583 ... LastLast
Results 721 to 730 of 972

Thread: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

  1. #721
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,567

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    Yeah, but you could break that into two categories really:

    1) Wealth of the society (availability of goods and services)
    2) Wealth within the society (ability to get those goods and services which are available)
    I suspect that what many people call wealth excludes anything other than long term goods, securities, and money. I also think they are incorrect, but whadaIno.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  2. #722
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,567

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    I also think that money isn't really wealth. It's just a temporary story of value and an accounting tool, much like a point system.

    Our government could send every American a billion dollars, but unless that money somehow resulted in the creation of more goods and services, as a nation, we wouldn't be any more wealthy. Likewise we could equally redistribute all existing wealth, but in aggregate, we wouldn't be any wealthier, unless that redistribution process resulted in the creation of more goods and services.

    When I have money in the bank or in my cookie jar, I just have points, which I could potentially exchange for wealth.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  3. #723
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    Right, but it wasn't the homes that caused it (mostly) - it was the leveraging via securities that did it. As I recall:

    1) You have the loan
    2) Then you have an insurance against that loan
    3) Then you have a security that essentially betting on that insurance

    Yes, it sucks for the bank if the loan wasn't paid back, but they are insured against failure via #2. Yes, it sucks to have to pay the insurance to the banks, and Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG may have still been in trouble. However, the mortgage backed security that bet on the insurance that could be leveraged as many times as the market was willing... that's where the damage was done.

    If you take a loan and insurance on those loans, they are easily calculatable maximum losses. That means you can easily hedge it or keep enough equity to pay off losses. However, the mortgage-backed securities had unlimited loss and profit potential. And those who were long on those securities ****ing lost their asses. They were supposed to be AAA-rated, near guaranteed return on investment, so you can go long as **** on those, not be terribly hedged, leverage the **** out of it, and feel good about getting a nice ROI.

    Except they didn't. They lost everything. Everyone went under. The stock market plunged. Banks stopped lending. It was a **** show. I could be wrong, Papa Bull, but I would bet the actual money lost on housing was a small percentage of the money compared to that which was lost on the mortgage-backed securities.
    I think you're wrong about that because the losses from the mortgage-backed securities WERE the losses from the mortgages. The reason the securities lost their value was because they were backed by mortgages with no value that were backed by homes with no value. Literally, all the bad debt flowed from the mortgage defaults.

    Here is an excellent and EXPERT non-partisan explanation: http://www.investopedia.com/universi...it-crisis4.asp
    Last edited by Papa bull; 01-22-15 at 06:33 PM.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  4. #724
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    Yes, it sucks for the bank if the loan wasn't paid back, but they are insured against failure via #2. Yes, it sucks to have to pay the insurance to the banks, and Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG may have still been in trouble. However, the mortgage backed security that bet on the insurance that could be leveraged as many times as the market was willing... that's where the damage was done.
    I think that's exactly right in general terms. In the early days of the collapse, I read and heard many commentators putting loss numbers on the actual loans themselves - the mortgages - and the point was always, "look, half could go sour and we'd still be OK, don't panic! Losses are contained, etc." But that was just the very tip of a giant iceberg, as you summarize, and never really was the problem. The problem was, as one commenter I listen to summarizes them, bets on bets, and sometimes bets on bets on bets. So you might have a mortgage of $100,000 and bets on that mortgage, and the interest payments, and the default, totaling any number - $10 million, no limit.

    Honestly I read the numbers outstanding - maybe $1,000 TRILLION (numbers beyond our capability to grasp) and just can't help but conclude we'd be better to burn it all down and start again. What is essentially a parasitic activity - finance, lending, etc. that itself produces NOTHING of value - now rules the world.

  5. #725
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    It's like talking to a wall. J-mac, did you have something relevant or actually though out that you wanted to add, or should we just keep going in circles where you make a random accusation that is off topic and incorrect and I refute it?
    Are you saying that Obama didn't say that in the SoTU?
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  6. #726
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by JANFU View Post
    What do you think? The middle class is disappearing. At one time increases in productivity equated to wage increases.
    https://fortune.com/2015/01/19/the-1...6-report-says/
    The richest 1% of the population will own more than half of the world’s wealth by next year as inequality continues its relentless rise across the globe, a new report out Monday says.

    The report, by the U.K.-based charity Oxfam, shows that the top 1% have grown their share of global wealth constantly since 2010. After dipping at 44% in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, it rose to 48% by the end of last year and is poised to top 50% by the end of next year.
    Be careful with that viral statistic about the top 1% owning half the world
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  7. #727
    Living in Gods country


    JANFU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    17,787

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Stats can be played- The US census bureau has more credible Stats. Check them out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Hillary is the only defense I or anyone else needs.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Not once have I showed my dick to a woman and she thought it was creepy. In fact, in 100% of the cases, they were pretty excited about it. I don't know who you're showing your **** too.

  8. #728
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,505

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    That does show the stats from a different perspective, doesn't it? I found this interesting:

    The statistic Oxfam is using here has deep flaws. But the addition of indebtedness actually does add some value: it points towards who has the ability to use wealth as a discretionary power resource. The top one percent controls an eye-popping amount of global wealth, but more to the point, they're the ones who have much more wealth than they have debt — and so they're the ones who can deploy their excess wealth towards discretionary ends like electing political candidates and lobbying legislatures.
    which is the real problem with great wealth being concentrated. Wealth equals political power, and, unfortunately, political power generates wealth (or can at least.)

    Case in point: California's own senator Dianne Feinstien. Guess who's husband just got the multi billion dollar contract to build the train to nowhere, aka the "high speed rail"? Yep, that's right. It was Feinstein.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  9. #729
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    That does show the stats from a different perspective, doesn't it? I found this interesting:



    which is the real problem with great wealth being concentrated. Wealth equals political power, and, unfortunately, political power generates wealth (or can at least.)

    Case in point: California's own senator Dianne Feinstien. Guess who's husband just got the multi billion dollar contract to build the train to nowhere, aka the "high speed rail"? Yep, that's right. It was Feinstein.
    There's no arguing that the richer you are, the more you can affect. However, the line being played here is about how much the rich have, or more importantly how little everyone else has. The reality is that "most" of the rest have enough, but the stats are used to say something different. Personally, I don't give a crap how much money Gates, Romney or anyone else has....so long as I have enough to take care of my family properly.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  10. #730
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    That does show the stats from a different perspective, doesn't it? I found this interesting:



    which is the real problem with great wealth being concentrated. Wealth equals political power, and, unfortunately, political power generates wealth (or can at least.)

    Case in point: California's own senator Dianne Feinstien. Guess who's husband just got the multi billion dollar contract to build the train to nowhere, aka the "high speed rail"? Yep, that's right. It was Feinstein.
    Wow...Wasn't her husband just revealed in something else she had oversight over concerning defense, or something like that? I tell ya, she is really making a name lately as a corrupt, vengeful part of everything that is wrong with Washington....
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 73 of 98 FirstFirst ... 2363717273747583 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •