• 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!

Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

  • Total voters
    37
ttwtt78640 said:
Exactly. If the gov't wants a number, like the CPI to go down, then it goes down. Since most people must still spend their money on gasoline (for work, doctor visits or shopping), even more of it lately, that makes the official gov't version of reality far different from actual reality.
Click to expand...
Things like the basket of goods changing doesn't happen very often. It's not like they go through each year and say, we'll include this and this and this but not that or that - then change it next year. It's just doesn't work that way. You guys are blowing this stuff up WAAAY out of proportion.



I'm not even going to bother with your U-3 comparison. It's been that way forever. If you want to compare something else then you can do so. The information is available, all you have to do is make a few clicks to get it. If that's too much work then it wasn't very important to you anyway.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
And obviously you just took the information provided - and you could have included even more information in your personal analysis - and you came to your own conclusions. That's exactly what I've been saying. The information of how they got their numbers is there, use it as you see fit or change it and reassess, as you just did. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I guess you missed my example from the government web site:

'Extended the use of hedonic regression to estimate the value of items changing in quality'

Look at the word 'estimate'.

The government admits that much of the CPI calculation is pure estimation (and this example was on the very top of the governments list as to how they calculate the CPI).

If someone is using subjective means to calculate something, then it is almost impossible to check or verify their conclusions - because it is subjective.

As for other information not being available, anyone could do it if they wanted to do it.
Click to expand...
No they cannot - virtually no one can in the private sector because NO ONE has full and complete access to ALL the government data AND the EXACT calculation process that the government uses.

The government only provides generalities - not specifics.



And no I am not an economist.
 
Last edited:
DA60 said:
I guess you missed my example from the government web site:
'Extended the use of hedonic regression to estimate the value of items changing in quality'
Look at the word 'estimate'.
The government admits that much of the CPI calculation is pure estimation (and this example was on the very top of the governments list as to how they calculate the CPI).
If someone is using subjective means to calculate something, then it is almost impossible to check or verify their conclusions - because it is subjective.
Click to expand...
And they posted the exact adjustment numbers they used. The adjustment number may be an estimate but it's still a published number and people can use, change, or discard those estimate numbers as they see fit. It's a simple change in a spreadsheet. How hard is that to do?

You're acting like there's no one checking the government numbers, that the government can just make **** up on a whim and no one would catch them doing it. That's just crazy. Too many people doing economic forecasts rely on those numbers. If the government started doing that, the private sector would scream bloody murder and call them on it. I may not completely understand what the government is doing with all those numbers - but I don't have to know. There are whole armies of accountants, analysts, and economists in the private sector doing that job for me.

DA60 said:
No they cannot - virtually no one can in the private sector because NO ONE has full and complete access to ALL the government data AND the EXACT calculation process that the government uses.
The government only provides generalities - not specifics.
Click to expand...
No, it provides the numbers it uses to adjust the raw data. I gave you those examples already.

But I wasn't talking about using government numbers. Many financial corporations have the resources to do the same basket method as the government if they felt a need to do so. That they don't do so tells me they're either happy using government data or they take the government data and adjust them as they see fit instead of using the same adjustment numbers as the government.

DA60 said:
And no I am not an economist.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
And they posted the exact adjustment numbers they used. The adjustment number may be an estimate but it's still a published number and people can use, change, or discard those estimate numbers as they see fit. It's a simple change in a spreadsheet. How hard is that to do?

You're acting like there's no one checking the government numbers, that the government can just make **** up on a whim and no one would catch them doing it. That's just crazy. Too many people doing economic forecasts rely on those numbers. If the government started doing that, the private sector would scream bloody murder and call them on it. I may not completely understand what the government is doing with all those numbers - but I don't have to know. There are whole armies of accountants, analysts, and economists in the private sector doing that job for me.

No, it provides the numbers it uses to adjust the raw data. I gave you those examples already.

But I wasn't talking about using government numbers. Many financial corporations have the resources to do the same basket method as the government if they felt a need to do so. That they don't do so tells me they're either happy using government data or they take the government data and adjust them as they see fit instead of using the same adjustment numbers as the government.
Click to expand...

For the last time - there are hundreds/thousands of different minute calculations to determine the CPI, the government does not publish them.
They only publish generalities or the calculation totals of groups - NOT every single calculation they made.

Show me exactly where they published - for last month's CPI totals - the hundreds/thousands of calculations for every single household item that they monitored.

Not the general 'score' for that group of household items.

But EVERY SINGLE calculation that they made on EVERY SINGLE product that they utilized and EVERY single justification and/or reasoning they gave for every single one of these items?

Plus - since they use efficiencies as a calculating tool - I want to see the list of them, the products involved, how exactly they determined the added efficiency, the sources for that tabulation, the source for that data - and I want to see it for every single group and sub group that they used to tabulate the CPI.


Can you provide that - yes or no?

The answer is 'no' - the government does not provide that data.

So there is no way to determine the actual CPI of America.
 
DA60 said:
For the last time - there are hundreds/thousands of different minute calculations to determine the CPI, the government does not publish them.
They only publish generalities or the calculation totals of groups - NOT every single calculation they made.
Show me exactly where they published - for last month's CPI totals - the hundreds/thousands of calculations for every single household item that they monitored.
Not the general 'score' for that group of household items.
But EVERY SINGLE calculation that they made on EVERY SINGLE product that they utilized and EVERY single justification and/or reasoning they gave for every single one of these items?
Plus - since they use efficiencies as a calculating tool - I want to see the list of them, the products involved, how exactly they determined the added efficiency, the sources for that tabulation, the source for that data - and I want to see it for every single group and sub group that they used to tabulate the CPI.
Can you provide that - yes or no?
The answer is 'no' - the government does not provide that data.
So there is no way to determine the actual CPI of America.
Click to expand...
Then as far as you're concerned it's meaningless and you should stop paying attention to it. LOL! Forget there are people that do this for a living that use those numbers every day of their financial career.



I showed you the place to start to look for all that information. I linked a 108 page *.pdf file - have you been through that entire thing? Have you followed all the categories listed in it? Did you look up all the references used in it? If not then you haven't a leg to stand on in demanding anything. I DID scan through it and there's stuff in there I have no clue about because I'm not an economist. The equations are there, the adjustment numbers are there or in subsequent government code. Look it up for yourself. Start with "http://www.bls.gov" and continue bravely forward. Good luck.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
I showed you the place to start to look for all that information. I linked a 108 page *.pdf file - have you been through that entire thing? Have you followed all the categories listed in it? Did you look up all the references used in it?
Click to expand...
Yes I did.

Here is another example:

'The primary objective of the Commodities and Services (C&S)
sample design is to determine values for all sample design
variables that minimize the sampling variance of 6-month
price change for the C&S portion of the Consumer Price
Index (CPI). The sample design variables are the number of
entry level items (ELIs) to select in each item stratum and the
number of outlets to select per Telephone Point-of-Purchase
Survey (TPOPS) category-replicate panel in each Primary
Sampling Unit (PSU). To that end, the variance of price
change for the C&S portion of the CPI and the total annual
cost of data collection and processing are modeled as functions of the design variables. These models allow the sample
design problem to be expressed as one of minimizing the total
variance of price change, subject to various cost and sample
allocation constraints. Within this framework, nonlinear programming methods are used to solve the problem for optimal
values of the sample design variables.
Certain simplifying assumptions are made to render the
problem tractable and operationally more manageable.'

http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch17.pdf


They are confirming here that they are using models, generalities...NOT specific data.

And that is just one example.


Here is another:

'Apples
FK011—Apples'

http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch17.pdf


Which types of apples? From what areas? Is this wholesale or retail? Where specifically did they get there data? From what sources? Show us this data.

Can you answer this...yes or no, please?


And this is just one of hundreds/thousands of examples.
 
Last edited:
DA60 said:
Yes I did.

Here is another example:

'The primary objective of the Commodities and Services (C&S)
sample design is to determine values for all sample design
variables that minimize the sampling variance of 6-month
price change for the C&S portion of the Consumer Price
Index (CPI). The sample design variables are the number of
entry level items (ELIs) to select in each item stratum and the
number of outlets to select per Telephone Point-of-Purchase
Survey (TPOPS) category-replicate panel in each Primary
Sampling Unit (PSU). To that end, the variance of price
change for the C&S portion of the CPI and the total annual
cost of data collection and processing are modeled as functions of the design variables. These models allow the sample
design problem to be expressed as one of minimizing the total
variance of price change, subject to various cost and sample
allocation constraints. Within this framework, nonlinear programming methods are used to solve the problem for optimal
values of the sample design variables.
Certain simplifying assumptions are made to render the
problem tractable and operationally more manageable.'

http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch17.pdf


They are confirming here that they are using models, generalities...NOT specific data.

And that is just one example.


Here is another:

'Apples
FK011—Apples'

http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch17.pdf


Which types of apples? From what areas? Is this wholesale or retail? Where specifically did they get there data? From what sources? Show us this data.

Can you answer this...yes or no, please?


And this is just one of hundreds/thousands of examples.
Click to expand...
CPI is a data-rape drug.
 
DA60 said:
Yes I did.

Here is another example:

'The primary objective of the Commodities and Services (C&S)
sample design is to determine values for all sample design
variables that minimize the sampling variance of 6-month
price change for the C&S portion of the Consumer Price
Index (CPI). The sample design variables are the number of
entry level items (ELIs) to select in each item stratum and the
number of outlets to select per Telephone Point-of-Purchase
Survey (TPOPS) category-replicate panel in each Primary
Sampling Unit (PSU). To that end, the variance of price
change for the C&S portion of the CPI and the total annual
cost of data collection and processing are modeled as functions of the design variables. These models allow the sample
design problem to be expressed as one of minimizing the total
variance of price change, subject to various cost and sample
allocation constraints. Within this framework, nonlinear programming methods are used to solve the problem for optimal
values of the sample design variables.
Certain simplifying assumptions are made to render the
problem tractable and operationally more manageable.'

http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch17.pdf
They are confirming here that they are using models, generalities...NOT specific data.
And that is just one example.
Here is another:
'Apples
FK011—Apples'
http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch17.pdf
Which types of apples? From what areas? Is this wholesale or retail? Where specifically did they get there data? From what sources? Show us this data.
Can you answer this...yes or no, please?
And this is just one of hundreds/thousands of examples.
Click to expand...
Just looking at the first paragraph (which should be in quote tags, BTW) I see "Telephone Point-of-Purchase Survey". What do you suppose that means if it isn't a telephone survey in the classical sense, in this case asking the price of apples (since you wanted to focus on that commodity)?? They then use a statistical method as described (sorry, I'm not a statistician, either - are YOU?) to process the data into a usable format for the report. That doesn't mean they're taking the price of apples out of their butt, they're taking a survey, which gives them a whole lot of data points about apple prices in a given area, then they apply their "model" (which is nothing more than the equations listed in the *.pdf file) to that data to get a final number.

http://www.bls.gov/web/ppi/ppitable06.pdf


And, once again, any financial institution can do their own survey.
How many actually bother to do their own survey? Zero that I know of.



I've had it with doing your homework for you. If you want to carry on about the CPI and how the government is lying to us under the noses of every private financial institution in the free world then you go right ahead and rant - preferably in the Conspiracy section. In any event I'm through discussing your WAGs.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
Just looking at the first paragraph (which should be in quote tags, BTW) I see "Telephone Point-of-Purchase Survey". What do you suppose that means if it isn't a telephone survey in the classical sense, in this case asking the price of apples (since you wanted to focus on that commodity)?? They then use a statistical method as described (sorry, I'm not a statistician, either - are YOU?) to process the data into a usable format for the report. That doesn't mean they're taking the price of apples out of their butt, they're taking a survey, which gives them a whole lot of data points about apple prices in a given area, then they apply their "model" (which is nothing more than the equations listed in the *.pdf file) to that data to get a final number.

http://www.bls.gov/web/ppi/ppitable06.pdf


And, once again, any financial institution can do their own survey.
How many actually bother to do their own survey? Zero that I know of.



I've had it with doing your homework for you. If you want to carry on about the CPI and how the government is lying to us under the noses of every private financial institution in the free world then you go right ahead and rant - preferably in the Conspiracy section. In any event I'm through discussing your WAGs.
Click to expand...

Once again, you did not answer my questions - what kind of apples, wholesale/retail, what sources, what locations, where are the results, show us the results?

You answered none of these - and do you know why?

Because no one outside of the government can - because the government does not make that data available.

That is why no one else can figure out the CPI - BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT RELEASE ENOUGH DATA FOR ANYONE TO DO IT ON THEIR OWN.


The CPI is a system set up by the government to accurately report their version of inflation in America.

It is not the real inflation rate - it is a deliberately understated rate.


Don't believe me?

Just Google 'CPI is inaccurate' or something like that. And you will get plenty of people that agree with me.

People like Jim Rogers, Marc Faber, Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, The Mises Institute and many other respected (at least by me) economists....ALL of whom accurately predicted the housing crash back in '07, btw.
 
NO
But, my reason is this - there must be anti-trust legislation to control the size of these TBTFs ( too big to fail)..
This was done to Standard Oil a century ago; it appears as if this must be dione again.....its either this or nationalization.....
 
DaveFagan said:
Yes, and with minimal compensation to stockholders.
Click to expand...

The idea is to force the stock-holders to participate, to care, rather than trust others; otherwise, their shirts can be lost...
I do not know if this will work.
But it is an interesting idea.
 
DA60 said:
People like Jim Rogers, Marc Faber, Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, The Mises Institute and many other respected (at least by me) economists....ALL of whom accurately predicted the housing crash back in '07, btw.
Click to expand...
I guess I'm a "respected economist". :2razz:

I predicted the housing bust 3-4 years before it happened. Simply because the boom wasn't based on anything "real". It was just hype, excitement, greed, and too-easy & too big loans.
 
DA60 said:
No private company should EVER be nationalized in America.

Additionally, no private company should EVER be bailed out again.
Click to expand...

Totally disagree..
Companies have been nationalized in the past as they were too greedy or too irresponsible (during times of war).
I would agree with sentence two, IF the bail-outs were ineffective...
They were not.
 
Too big to fail shouldn't exist as a concept in the first place.

In a fair free market system if you're large you should be allowed to fail (due to bad business policies) and the slack picked up by other businesses as is fit for the economic climate.
 
digsbe said:
Too big to fail shouldn't exist as a concept in the first place.

In a fair free market system if you're large you should be allowed to fail (due to bad business policies) and the slack picked up by other businesses as is fit for the economic climate.
Click to expand...

Digsby, do you understand why our forefathers put a firewall between investment banks and commercial banks after the great depression via the Glass-Steagall Act?
 
Catawba said:
Digsby, do you understand why our forefathers put a firewall between investment banks and commercial banks after the great depression via the Glass-Steagall Act?
Click to expand...

I've always understood “our forefathers” to refer to the men who founded this country in the late eighteenth century, and those who established the principles upon which this nation was founded.

I don't understand this term to have any reference to people who lived more than a century later, and whose activities had nothing to do with the initial founding of this nation.


Perhaps to someone who disagrees with the initial founding principles of this nation, one who much later participated in legislation to overturn some of these founding principles is a “forefather”; but not to most Americans.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
I've always understood “our forefathers” to refer to the men who founded this country in the late eighteenth century, and those who established the principles upon which this nation was founded.

I don't understand this term to have any reference to people who lived more than a century later, and whose activities had nothing to do with the initial founding of this nation.

Perhaps to someone who disagrees with the initial founding principles of this nation, one who much later participated in legislation to overturn some of these founding principles is a “forefather”; but not to most Americans.
Click to expand...
In a strict technical sense he is not incorrect, but it is still a failure to communicate when a particular phrase that is commonly known to mean one thing is used to mean something else... as in this case.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
I've always understood “our forefathers” to refer to the men who founded this country in the late eighteenth century, and those who established the principles upon which this nation was founded.

I don't understand this term to have any reference to people who lived more than a century later, and whose activities had nothing to do with the initial founding of this nation.


Perhaps to someone who disagrees with the initial founding principles of this nation, one who much later participated in legislation to overturn some of these founding principles is a “forefather”; but not to most Americans.
Click to expand...


Then you should try looking up the term in the dictionary. You are thinking of founding fathers.
 
Last edited:
Canell said:
If things start to go nasty again and new bailouts are on the way, should the "too big to fail" be nationalised instead? :coffeepap
Click to expand...

No -- they should go out of business.
 
NolaMan said:
No -- they should go out of business.
Click to expand...

Only if we separate investment banks from commercial banks first. Otherwise, we have a failed monetary system world wide.

After we once again have a firewall between investment banks and commercial banks, I'm right with you, let them fail if they take unwise risks.
 
Catawba said:
Only if we separate investment banks from commercial banks first. Otherwise, we have a failed monetary system world wide.

After we once again have a firewall between investment banks and commercial banks, I'm right with you, let them fail if they take unwise risks.
Click to expand...

Fair enough -- but it seems unlikely we will get back to that point any time soon.
 
radcen said:
I guess I'm a "respected economist". :2razz:

I predicted the housing bust 3-4 years before it happened. Simply because the boom wasn't based on anything "real". It was just hype, excitement, greed, and too-easy & too big loans.
Click to expand...
Having common sense would disqualify you from becoming an economist. The key theory of the required economics is that in order for the economy to prosper, people must pay economists big bucks to tell them what their economic situation is. Because it is in his own economic interest to make those who hire him feel how smart they are, an economist is just a toy rat for fatcats to play with.
 
Disputatious71 said:
This thread is not discussing problems with these market systems only whether or not the problem companies should be nationalized.
Click to expand...

You can't discuss one without the other. The problem with companies which are "too big to fail" is that our government failed to prevent them, through regulation, from growing "too big to fail". IMO, "too big to fail" is just a nice way of saying monopoly or something close to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom