• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sen. John McCain: I was misled on bailout

Really? You always point out the fact that people want to save so we need inflation to stop that.

When did i say that?

How is it that the financial system would have collapsed?

Are you kidding? AIG's inability to honer their insurance swaps instantaneously devalues a considerable amount of securities held by financial institutions across the globe. The FDIC would have been liable for trillions upon trillions, not billions.

Would a lot of companies gone under? Yes, and I say good. Some banks would have stuck around, and they would have gotten all the savings.

You mean whatever savings were left? Your greenness shows through a statement such as the one above....

Just get rid of FDIC and people would take care to research where they are saving their money.

Research does not prevent a bank run or insolvency.

Oh yeah, I'll be so glad that money will be wasted via government spending on things that I don't want. That's the way to have an economy responsive to your needs.

Would you like some cheese?
 
When I mention inflation on this board I mean money supply. Ask people I've debated with on this board before. So no, that graph doesn't prove me wrong.

ok. in the future, when directing posts your way, i will substitute the term money supply whenever people who know what they are talking about would actually use the term inflation

do you feel better now


now, in return, i expect you to use the expression "dumb ass" whenever posting in reponse to me, in those instances where people who actually have an understanding of economics would instead use the term "conservative"
 
What next, he is against illegal immigration or something else?


Sen. John McCain: I was misled on bailout

Under growing pressure from conservatives and "tea party" activists, Sen. John McCain of Arizona is having to defend his record of supporting the government's massive bailout of the financial system.

In response to criticism from opponents seeking to defeat him in the Aug. 24 Republican primary, the four-term senator says he was misled by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. McCain said the pair assured him that the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program would focus on what was seen as the cause of the financial crisis, the housing meltdown.

"Obviously, that didn't happen," McCain said in a meeting Thursday with The Republic's Editorial Board, recounting his decision-making during the critical initial days of the fiscal crisis. "They decided to stabilize the Wall Street institutions, bail out (insurance giant) AIG, bail out Chrysler, bail out General Motors. . . . What they figured was that if they stabilized Wall Street - I guess it was trickle-down economics - that therefore Main Street would be fine."

Nearly 15 months later, commercial lenders still are in shaky condition and the commercial real-estate industry is in trouble, he said. On Friday, President Barack Obama announced $1.5 billion in funding for new measures to help Arizona and four other states hit hard by the tanked housing market and by joblessness.

But McCain stopped short of calling the TARP a mistake.

"Something had to be done because the world's financial system was on the verge of collapse," he said. "Any economist, liberal or conservative, would agree with that. The action they took, I don't agree with."

Republican Senate primary challenger J.D. Hayworth is using the TARP vote as a bludgeon against McCain's reputation as a fiscal hawk. Tea partyers point to it as the start of a new explosion of federal spending that has continued into the Obama administration.

I don't like McCain, but I think even less of him for refusing to stand behind his votes and actions. There's no bravery in politics these days, no willingness to support unpopular ideas that you truly believe are the best way to go; just pandering. On the left and the right.
 
When did i say that?

You say that we save too much during recessions, don't you?

Are you kidding? AIG's inability to honer their insurance swaps instantaneously devalues a considerable amount of securities held by financial institutions across the globe. The FDIC would have been liable for trillions upon trillions, not billions.

I guess that goes hand-in-hand with what I say about FDIC.

You mean whatever savings were left? Your greenness shows through a statement such as the one above....

So then nearly 100% of the populace would have been unemployed and unable to accumulate wealth? Really?

Research does not prevent a bank run or insolvency.

Yes, it does. A bank with a relatively high reserve ratio is not going to go under as quickly or ever (depending on how high it is) like banks with low reserve ratios.

Would you like some cheese?

When the economy is not responsive to the demands of population then your economy sucks.
 
You say that we save too much during recessions, don't you?

Nope! I said that saving increases during recessions as income decreases. This is brought on due to fear and is not desirable. A recession is not... i repeat is not relieved because a necessary amount of saving is achieved.

It relates to human behavior and psychology.

I guess that goes hand-in-hand with what I say about FDIC.

Maybe, you have to expand your quote a bit.

So then nearly 100% of the populace would have been unemployed and unable to accumulate wealth? Really?

No need to put words in my mouth.... The FDIC goes bankrupt and the majority of peoples savings will be depleted.

Yes, it does. A bank with a relatively high reserve ratio is not going to go under as quickly or ever (depending on how high it is) like banks with low reserve ratios.

A bank with a relatively high reserve ratio was needed in dark ages. Such an institution is unprofitable and unnecessary. They do not meet the needs in the era of fiat.

When the economy is not responsive to the demands of population then your economy sucks.

What demands of yours are not being met? The people demand higher paying jobs! This economy does suck:2razz:
 
Nope! I said that saving increases during recessions as income decreases. This is brought on due to fear and is not desirable. A recession is not... i repeat is not relieved because a necessary amount of saving is achieved.

It relates to human behavior and psychology.

So people won't start spending money again when they feel secure again, when they've saved enough money? Really?

Maybe, you have to expand your quote a bit.

FDIC creates a moral hazard so that banks will be looser with the saved money than they should be.

No need to put words in my mouth.... The FDIC goes bankrupt and the majority of peoples savings will be depleted.

Unless they put their money in banks with a high reserve ratio. Those people will be fine, and people would start putting their money there.

A bank with a relatively high reserve ratio was needed in dark ages. Such an institution is unprofitable and unnecessary. They do not meet the needs in the era of fiat.

Lol, the era of fiat is what brought about these massive bubbles. High reserve ratio banks are the only banks that can survive the storm of recessions like this. They would be the only ones around after a while people people would only depend on them.

What demands of yours are not being met? The people demand higher paying jobs! This economy does suck:2razz:

This economy is not a free market economy. What a terrible example! This economy does suck. :2razz:
 
Back
Top Bottom