• 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!

Employers add no net jobs in Aug.; rate unchanged

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you really this naive? Do you understand what an IOU is? Ever tried to spend an IOU at the grocery store? IOU's have to be funded and that is on top of the debt we have. You don't appear to have a clue

 
Did you serve in Iraq or how did Iraq affect you or your family?

How about As of Tuesday Sept. 6, 2011 4,474 members of the U.S. military have died in Iraq plus three trillion(at least)dollars of our treasury.
 
You really don't know what the situation is, do you? We have many years to address the SS situation.

"The literal bottom line is that Social Security is financially more sound than the federal government as a whole.

Thanks to hikes in the Social Security payroll tax in the 1980s designed to create a surplus to handle the crunch of baby-boomer retirements, the program's trust fund is projected to grow steadily for nearly 20 more years — until 2027.

After that, officials estimate there will be sufficient money to pay 100 percent of benefits until 2041, when the surplus is expected to be exhausted. From that year on, payroll tax revenue alone should be able to meet 78 percent of the program's obligations — even if no changes are made.

That would mean substantially smaller checks — but a long way from nothing."

Social Security more solvent than most Americans realize - News - Ohio

Right, IOU's are counted as an asset, try spending one? Do you have any clue where the money is going to come from and what the total backing of the U.S. Govt means? The money is going to be there but from where? think about it, where are we going to come up with trillions of dollars to fund those IOU's

Social Security IOUs stashed away - Washington Times
 
How about As of Tuesday Sept. 6, 2011 4,474 members of the U.S. military have died in Iraq plus three trillion(at least)dollars of our treasury.

So how do we change that and what do we do now to solve our financial problems? Keep looking back and ignoring what is going in right now
 
Lets recap ... you don't know what a loan is, you don't know what a bailout us, you can't add to 16 trillion, you don't know what secrecy is, you don't know what a conspiracy is, and your waiting for someone else to research for you.

Your also a protector of the faithful like Iron Man, protecting America from lowbrow agendas, for truth, righteousness and theeeeeeeee American waaaayy. Protect us Captain Goldenbuoy.

This miserable attempt to save face displays your desperation.

Did you provide evidence of conspiracy? Unawareness is not conspiracy.

You are labeling the discount window and Fed funds overnight market as "secret"! Which of course is nonsense.

So we have gone from me stating there were 16 trillion dollars in secret bailouts to ... your request for info whom was it loaned to, liability, and are their any defaults. And the FED not having 16 trillion. And a lesson in banking for me. Bank of America taking 1 day loans for 100 billion 160 times ... :) So I misrepresented notional amounts and you as yet had no info on the loans.

I actually researched the the GAO report, found the figures, and located the discrepancy to which the counting techniques were manipulated to make the total loan amount seem larger than it should. Instead of looking at the pictures, i actually read this section of the report to which it stated:

Table 8 aggregates total dollar transaction amounts by adding the total dollar amount of all loans but does not adjust these amounts to reflect differences across programs in the term over which loans were outstanding. For example, an overnight PDCF loan of $10 billion that was renewed daily at the same level for 30 business days would result in an aggregate amount borrowed of $300 billion although the institution, in effect, borrowed only $10 billion over 30 days. In contrast, a TAF loan of $10 billion extended over a 1-month period would appear as $10 billion. As a result, the total transaction amounts shown in table 8 for PDCF are not directly comparable to the total transaction amounts shown for TAF and other programs that made loans for periods longer than overnight.
Source

I am not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem, little interest in understanding the subject, or a little bit of both; but it should be obvious to anyone as to why the total figure of $16 is intellectually dishonest.

Do you understand what "but does not adjust these amounts to reflect differences across programs in the term over which loans were outstanding." means?

Basically ... look for your self if you are interested. Foreign and national interests were helped.

Your ignorance is brewing. Primary dealers have had the ability to access the fed funds market and discount window since way before this this report came about. In fact, any member bank that is running below their required reserve ratio is basically required to go to either of these sources. An institution such as Deutche Bank is in fact a primary dealer!

If the counting techniques were applied throughout all lending facilities, i have little doubt they could have come up with a number of $40 trillion. None the less, such practice is not a GAAP.

Now that's a doozy ... a loan is not a bailout.

The fed funds market and discount window is not a bailout. Instead, they are an aspect of how the Fed conducts monetary policy.

The FED expectations as a lender have what to do with the amounts they loaned? 16 Trillion reduced to to 16 Billion? Were the loans secret? Did anyone in government have knowledge of these loans? Did any of these loans make it into a newspaper?

Nothing you posted above is of importance, because the Fed is mandated to act independent of political will. When Bank of America makes a loan to a Japanese company operating in the U.S., should this be considered a bailout or worthy of being national news? In fact, the only news sources that featured this "story" are associated with fringe elements.

Actually 16 trillion is technically correct ... that was the amount of the loans.

Technically, it is not because the same counting techniques were not held constant throught the summary.

but does not adjust these amounts to reflect differences across programs in the term over which loans were outstanding.

If you would like to prove the GAO report of 266 pages is a lie ... step up to the plate.

Never said they were lies, only intellectually dishonest.

So is an overnight loan ... not a loan? Is it the money fairy come to visit you in your sleep?

An overnight loan is certainly not a bailout! That much should be crystal clear, otherwise every time the Fed expands it's balance sheet, it is bailing out financial institutions.

Page 144 of the report ... see that little number in the lower right hand corner ... that's the loan amount.

On page 143, you will see these funny little things called words. Learn to read them!

sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO Fed Investigation.pdf

This is where I have to explain to an economics expert that a loan is a bailout. You didn't actually respond to this did you?

So when i trade on my margin account, essentially Interactive Brokers is giving me a bailout because it is in fact an overnight loan (technically speaking, it is a function of the brokerages overnight money market sweep). Of course not.

This is where I have to explain to you it was a one time audit the FED was trying to avoid. See when you have no oversight ... you can do what ever you want ... like 16 trillion in secret loans.

The political motive behind this audit cannot be denied (See Ron Paul). Therefore, i find it hilarious that you have essentially opened your mouth and inserted your foot thigh deep. Next time you want to make a statement, make sure to have enough ammo to back it up.:gunsmilie
 
So how do we change that and what do we do now to solve our financial problems? Keep looking back and ignoring what is going in right now

Well, it is true, we should not have gone into Iraq in the first place, but if we don't recognize that history, we will repeat it sooner or later. You have to face the past before you can learn from it.
 
Well, it is true, we should not have gone into Iraq in the first place, but if we don't recognize that history, we will repeat it sooner or later. You have to face the past before you can learn from it.

How does Iraq affect what is going on right now and the fact that we have a net job loss since this President took office?
 
How does Iraq affect what is going on right now and the fact that we have a net job loss since this President took office?

It is still costly, and we still have people dying there. Today.

Again, the government doesn't control jobs. If you want to charge government with jobs, you are in essence asking the government to hire people.
 
In reality it's actually the other way around. People tend to spend money if it's doled out in small quantities, as Obama has done with the payroll tax cuts. When you hand out the money in a lump sum, as Bush did, people tend to bank it or use it to pay down debt.

You will stretch the truth to fit you views to any length won't you? The Bush tax cuts were a one time payment ??? Guess there is no need to do anything with them then huh ?

While on the other hand, wasn't a portion of the stimulus a one time tax refund of about 400 dollars ?
Tell Me how is this payroll tax break (temporary tax break) working on stimulating the economy? We haven't moved off the 9% unemployment rate for months now … just another of your great success stories I guess.
 
It is still costly, and we still have people dying there. Today.

Again, the government doesn't control jobs. If you want to charge government with jobs, you are in essence asking the government to hire people.

The govt controls the atmosphere for creating jobs and if you think that economic policy such as Obamacare doesn't raise concerns with business you are very naive.
 

From your own article: "Social Security’s shortfall will not affect current benefits. As long as the IOUs last, benefits will keep flowing. But experts say it is a warning sign that the program’s finances are deteriorating. Social Security is projected to drain its trust funds by 2037 unless Congress acts."

It is a problem, but not an urgent problem.
 
So how do we change that and what do we do now to solve our financial problems? Keep looking back and ignoring what is going in right now

you did ask this question didn't you?
Did you serve in Iraq or how did Iraq affect you or your family?
In answer to your ingestion of " how do we change that and what do we do now to solve our financial problems? "That,s been told to you numerous times,by myself and others but you keep ignoring the answers.:roll:
 
The govt controls the atmosphere for creating jobs and if you think that economic policy such as Obamacare doesn't raise concerns with business you are very naive.

Not near as much as you think. As noted for you above, business did quite well with higher tax rates, for example. And business overall would prefer UHC because it wouold take that burden away from them.

But these are separate issues overall. the fact is government can't control jobs. Not without hiring people themselves anyway.
 
You will stretch the truth to fit you views to any length won't you? The Bush tax cuts were a one time payment ??? Guess there is no need to do anything with them then huh ?

While on the other hand, wasn't a portion of the stimulus a one time tax refund of about 400 dollars ?
Tell Me how is this payroll tax break (temporary tax break) working on stimulating the economy? We haven't moved off the 9% unemployment rate for months now … just another of your great success stories I guess.

I wasn't referring to the Bush tax cuts, but rather to his 2008 tax rebate. It's okay to ask questions. You don't always have to go off half cocked.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2008-04-25-tax-rebate-checks_N.htm

The Bush rebate was a lump sum payment, as opposed to Obama's payroll tax cut, which was prorated so that people receive a portion of it in each paycheck.
 
Last edited:
From your own article: "Social Security’s shortfall will not affect current benefits. As long as the IOUs last, benefits will keep flowing. But experts say it is a warning sign that the program’s finances are deteriorating. Social Security is projected to drain its trust funds by 2037 unless Congress acts."

It is a problem, but not an urgent problem.

It isn't going to affect anyone's benefits but it is going to affect their cost of living due to the borrowing or printing that money is going to cost. You are like far too many liberals, don't really care where the money comes form as long as you get yours. Fact, those IOU's have to be funded and as posted it is going to be with borrowed funds or printing money.
 
Not near as much as you think. As noted for you above, business did quite well with higher tax rates, for example. And business overall would prefer UHC because it wouold take that burden away from them.

But these are separate issues overall. the fact is government can't control jobs. Not without hiring people themselves anyway.

Business does well when there is stability and they know what is going to happen. You ignore that the GOP cut business taxes in 1997. More importantly most businesses operate on a five year plan and want to know what their costs are going to be during that period of time. With this Administration there is no way of knowing.
 
you did ask this question didn't you? In answer to your ingestion of " how do we change that and what do we do now to solve our financial problems? "That,s been told to you numerous times,by myself and others but you keep ignoring the answers.:roll:

How do we change what happened in the past was the question, I had three family members serve in Iraq so what is your point?
 
How about As of Tuesday Sept. 6, 2011 4,474 members of the U.S. military have died in Iraq plus three trillion(at least)dollars of our treasury.

Well seeing we can't change what happened, or what was spent consider this, If we pull out to soon, and don't leave enough troops there to give the Iraqi people that want freedom the best chance at success, then it will become a total waste of time lives and money. 5 or 10 years down the road, we'll still be debating who's fault the failure was.
 
This miserable attempt to save face displays your desperation.



You are labeling the discount window and Fed funds overnight market as "secret"! Which of course is nonsense.



I actually researched the the GAO report, found the figures, and located the discrepancy to which the counting techniques were manipulated to make the total loan amount seem larger than it should. Instead of looking at the pictures, i actually read this section of the report to which it stated:



I am not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem, little interest in understanding the subject, or a little bit of both; but it should be obvious to anyone as to why the total figure of $16 is intellectually dishonest.

Do you understand what "but does not adjust these amounts to reflect differences across programs in the term over which loans were outstanding." means?



Your ignorance is brewing. Primary dealers have had the ability to access the fed funds market and discount window since way before this this report came about. In fact, any member bank that is running below their required reserve ratio is basically required to go to either of these sources. An institution such as Deutche Bank is in fact a primary dealer!

If the counting techniques were applied throughout all lending facilities, i have little doubt they could have come up with a number of $40 trillion. None the less, such practice is not a GAAP.



The fed funds market and discount window is not a bailout. Instead, they are an aspect of how the Fed conducts monetary policy.



Nothing you posted above is of importance, because the Fed is mandated to act independent of political will. When Bank of America makes a loan to a Japanese company operating in the U.S., should this be considered a bailout or worthy of being national news? In fact, the only news sources that featured this "story" are associated with fringe elements.



Technically, it is not because the same counting techniques were not held constant throught the summary.





Never said they were lies, only intellectually dishonest.



An overnight loan is certainly not a bailout! That much should be crystal clear, otherwise every time the Fed expands it's balance sheet, it is bailing out financial institutions.



On page 143, you will see these funny little things called words. Learn to read them!

sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO Fed Investigation.pdf



So when i trade on my margin account, essentially Interactive Brokers is giving me a bailout because it is in fact an overnight loan (technically speaking, it is a function of the brokerages overnight money market sweep). Of course not.



The political motive behind this audit cannot be denied (See Ron Paul). Therefore, i find it hilarious that you have essentially opened your mouth and inserted your foot thigh deep. Next time you want to make a statement, make sure to have enough ammo to back it up.:gunsmilie

Whats with all the large bolded nonsense? Frustrated at not saving America as Captain Goldenbuoy in your golden cape?

16 Trillion ... don't try to sneakily changing it to 16 billion ... in loans. You do know what a loan is don't you?

You do know secrecy and sneaky see the amount change from 16 trillion to 16 billion ... I guess I don't have to explain secrecy to you.

Where is the conspiracy? You do know what a conspiracy is don't you ... that's when you squash the truth and attempt to misrepresent history as never having happened. Here's a conspiracy ... do you work for the FED? Are you out surfing ... trying to protect their interests?

You do know what a bailout is? See below:

In economics, a bailout is an act of loaning or giving capital to an entity (a company, a country, or an individual) that is in danger of failing, in an attempt to save it from bankruptcy, insolvency, or total liquidation and ruin; or to allow a failing entity to fail gracefully without spreading contagion.[1]

Why ask me to research for you? You have a search engine use it.

Lets recap ... you don't know what a loan is, you don't know what a bailout us, you can't add to 16 trillion, you don't know what secrecy is, you don't know what a conspiracy is, and your waiting for someone else to research for you.

Your also a protector of the faithful like Iron Man, protecting America from lowbrow agendas, for truth, righteousness and theeeeeeeee American waaaayy. Protect us Captain Goldenbuoy.

FED table 8.jpg

sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO Fed Investigation.pdf

What GAO Recommends
GAO makes seven recommendations
to the Federal Reserve Board to
strengthen policies for managing
noncompetitive vendor selections,
conflicts of interest, risks related to
emergency lending, and
documentation of emergency program
decisions. The Federal Reserve Board
agreed that GAO’s recommendations
would benefit its response to future
crises and agreed to strongly consider
how best to respond to them.
 
Last edited:
From your own article: "Social Security’s shortfall will not affect current benefits. As long as the IOUs last, benefits will keep flowing. But experts say it is a warning sign that the program’s finances are deteriorating. Social Security is projected to drain its trust funds by 2037 unless Congress acts."

It is a problem, but not an urgent problem.

Here is something you can do … write or email your congressman, and ask him point blank, how much “cash” in in the SS reserve fund. Ask him if there is enough “cash” in that fund, to fund payouts over the next 5 years. Let Me know what he says.

According to this article Social Security Payout to Exceed Revenue This Year - NYTimes.com This year they are going to be paying out more then they are taking in, so unless those reserve funds are in cash, then I guess I'm going to need a liberal explain to me how we can be running our government at a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit and still be able to make these payments over and above what is being taken in, without borrowing even more money.
 
Whats with all the large bolded nonsense? Frustrated at not saving America as Captain Goldenbuoy in your golden cape?

16 Trillion ... don't try to sneakily changing it to 16 billion ... in loans. You do know what a loan is don't you?

You do know secrecy and sneaky see the amount change from 16 trillion to 16 billion ... I guess I don't have to explain secrecy to you.

Where is the conspiracy? You do know what a conspiracy is don't you ... that's when you squash the truth and attempt to misrepresent history as never having happened. Here's a conspiracy ... do you work for the FED? Are you out surfing ... trying to protect their interests?

You do know what a bailout is? See below:

In economics, a bailout is an act of loaning or giving capital to an entity (a company, a country, or an individual) that is in danger of failing, in an attempt to save it from bankruptcy, insolvency, or total liquidation and ruin; or to allow a failing entity to fail gracefully without spreading contagion.[1]

Why ask me to research for you? You have a search engine use it.

Lets recap ... you don't know what a loan is, you don't know what a bailout us, you can't add to 16 trillion, you don't know what secrecy is, you don't know what a conspiracy is, and your waiting for someone else to research for you.

Your also a protector of the faithful like Iron Man, protecting America from lowbrow agendas, for truth, righteousness and theeeeeeeee American waaaayy. Protect us Captain Goldenbuoy.

View attachment 67115533

sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO Fed Investigation.pdf

In other words, since you lack the intellect to adequately respond to my post, you create straw man arguments that do not address what is being discussed. It is imperative that you actually read and understand something before you go off posting intellectual dishonesty like it actually means something. The report outlines the inconsistency in counting techniques, and i have explained it to you on multiple occasions. They do however adjust for it :lol:

On page 145, table 9, they factored out the discrepancy so to provide an accurate reading of the actual loans being made.

They state:
To account for differences in the terms for loans that were outstanding, we multiplied each loan amount by the number of days the loan was outstanding and divided this amount by the number of days in a year (365). Table 9 shows the top 20 borrowing institutions in terms of term adjusted total transaction amount for emergency programs and other assistance provided directly to institutions facing liquidity strains.

Are you ready?

GAO factored.jpg
GAO factored II.jpg

A grand total of $1,139 billion dollars. That is of course if we adjust the loan amount by term, which provides an intellectually honest assessment.

In the future, take your fail somewhere else....
:failpail:
 
Last edited:
In other words, since you lack the intellect to adequately respond to my post, you create straw man arguments that do not address what is being discussed. It is imperative that you actually read and understand something before you go off posting intellectual dishonesty like it actually means something. The report outlines the inconsistency in counting techniques, and i have explained it to you on multiple occasions. They do however adjust for it :lol:

On page 145, table 9, they factored out the discrepancy so to provide an accurate reading of the actual loans being made.

They state:

Are you ready?

View attachment 67115534
View attachment 67115535

A grand total of $1,139 billion dollars. That is of course if we adjust the loan amount by term, which provides an intellectually honest assessment.

In the future, take your fail somewhere else....
:failpail:

1. Was the quantity of loans 16 trillion? Yes

2. Was the subject you knew nothing about and had to research ... a conspiracy? No

3. Were the liquidity strains as you like to call them a bailout? Yes

4. Did you change 16 trillion to 16 billion to under represent the amount to those not paying attention? Yes

5. Were you looking for a personal research assistant? Yes ... and a go getter delegating work ... you'll do fine in management.

So my statement stands and you have nothing to show for your efforts. Other then being dishonest about items 1 through 4 ... and being lazy on item 5.
 
Last edited:
1. Was the quantity of loans 16 trillion? Yes

No, they did not count the TAF loans (the largest of all loans) in the same manner that they counted the PDCF. If they were to apply the same accounting technique to all credit facilities listed, the quantity of loans could easy have reached $40 trillion (the TAF loans alone were more than 8x's greater than the PDCF on a factored term basis).

2. Was the subject you knew nothing about and had to research a conspiracy? No

I was well aware of the subject, as i explained the counting technique before you posted the source. CNBC did a report on this back in July, and essentially poked fun at anyone who attempted to capitalize (on a political basis) with the $16 trillion number.

3. Were the liquidity strains as you like to call them a bailout? Yes

You're taking it out of context. Credit contracted to the point where companies were going to go bankrupt without access to credit. The freeze in the commercial paper market alone would have caused an unprecendted amount of bankruptcies without access to these credit facilities. Yes, some entities were bailed out (Fannie and Freddy), but not to the tune of $16 trillion.

4. Did you change 16 trillion to 16 billion to under represent the amount to those not paying attention? Yes

No, it was a simple mistake. I apologize.

5. Were you looking for a personal research assistant? Yes ... and a go getter delegating work ... you'll do fine in management.

Not at all. I simply will not allow you to misrepresent figures in a low brow manner. Sorry if it hurts your feelings, but you are at fault for not having a clear understanding of the situation.

So my statement stands and you have nothing to show for your efforts. Other then being dishonest about items 1 through 4 ... and being lazy on item 5.

Items 1-4 are strawmen you have created to attempt to hide the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about, within the context of the various monetary policy initiatives taken in the midst of the financial crisis.

Now man up and admit your error. Again, there is no shame.
 
I wasn't referring to the Bush tax cuts, but rather to his 2008 tax rebate. It's okay to ask questions. You don't always have to go off half cocked.

Bush: Tax rebate checks are on the way - USATODAY.com

The Bush rebate was a lump sum payment, as opposed to Obama's payroll tax cut, which was prorated so that people receive a portion of it in each paycheck.

okay, and what was the 400 dollars tax rebate from the stimulus ... a one time payment ?? kinda like the The Bush rebate ? and Bush's tax cut which everyone received ( and is still receiving) a portion of in each paycheck, the only difference is Bush's wasn't a one year program.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom