- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
- Messages
- 30,870
- Reaction score
- 4,246
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Rising GDP is not necessarily indicative of getting out of a recession. Prove to me that quality of life is going to rise.
So, because one program is not living up to expectations, the entire effort to reduce pollution is not worth while.
Got it. :roll:
So then why do banks fail?
Yes, you are wrong. Next question?
Are you really going there? Banks fail (for the most part) because of their own stupid "investments" or risks that they take. If a bank fails, it's the banks fault. If the economy depends on people spending money (which it does) then it's the consumers' faults.
Why do you molest children? And no, I don't mean it as a personal attack. I mean it as a question that I can state without proof, as you just did. Why don't you back up your argument instead of just saying I'm wrong. Perhaps you're wrong about everything in life. Until proof is shown either way, it's all speculation and heresay.
Do these "stupid" banks only invest their own money??
Very simple. Because rich people's, or poor people's, money doesn't sit in banks. The money you put in banks is loaned to people to buy cars, houses, furniture, or whatever.
Banks wouldn't make any money if they left it sitting in a vault would they?
If the rich people don't put money in the banks, the banks have no money to loan to you.
Very simple. Because rich people's, or poor people's, money doesn't sit in banks. The money you put in banks is loaned to people to buy cars, houses, furniture, or whatever.
Banks wouldn't make any money if they left it sitting in a vault would they?
If the rich people don't put money in the banks, the banks have no money to loan to you.
I think you're missing the point. The banks would still have money if it was flowing through the economy. If more people had more money (through cash flow) then they'd need to loan less. At the same time, banks would be making money through their loans and the larger number of people with a surplus of money would be banking that extra money. Just because there's cash flow doesn't mean money DOESN'T sit in banks.
So you're saying that because rich people put their money in the bank, the bank invested their money in stupid endeavors, causing them to fail? :doh
If everyone is spending their money, then what money do banks have to loan out?
What he's trying to say is that the physical backing for loans is the money that people put into banks.
Exactly. He's trying to draw a parallel between rich people leaving money in the bank and banks failing. Since banks basically invest other people's money (more or less), they wouldn't have large amount of money to play the risky game if people didn't put so much money into the bank.
You know, it's funny that I've been attacked for knowing nothing about how the economy works when nothing's been said that compromises my position.
This is what I was trying to get him to realize for himself by asking all of my questions.
You're jumping to a conclusion here that just isn't true. Answer some more questions for me.
Does a bank only loan out the money that it has in reserve? Well no, because we know that banks fail, and this happens when people cannot get all of the money back that they had given to the bank. So then banks fail, and it is because they loaned out more money than they had. So tell me, when banks are loaning out money that they do not have, is the act of investing really responsible for those bad loans?
How about this. I've already answered y'alls last ten questions or so. How about if I'm so wrong, y'all just explain to me how ignorant of economics I am (or whatever). I'm really getting tired of this game as I've answered the last few questions with nothing to show for it except "yeah, well answer these questions now." One of y'all made the statement that I should stop talking about economics because I know nothing about it yet it's taking a load of questions to get nowhere.
Just explain how I was wrong instead of making me answer a gauntlet of questions.
phattonez said:Does a bank only loan out the money that it has in reserve? Well no, because we know that banks fail, and this happens when people cannot get all of the money back that they had given to the bank. So then banks fail, and it is because they loaned out more money than they had. So tell me, when banks are loaning out money that they do not have, is the act of investing really responsible for those bad loans?
I was surprised to learn that the chemical used to seize the engine can not be removed by recycling, and that the engine blocks can not be scraped.
Chemical wast in the land fill FTW :2wave:
Interesting, got a Link? seems to me that the small amount of chemical isn't enolugh to impact the millions of tons of scrap metal recycled each year...
Sodium silicate.
The Killer App for Clunkers Breathes Fresh Life Into 'Liquid Glass' - WSJ.com
Sodium sillicate may make it impossible to separate cast iron from aluminum and steel.
I'll be honest, I'm not really sold on this "buy American" when it comes to cars. I mean, if I buy American, I inevitably am supporting the UAW which I don't like. If I buy a foreign made car, say a BMW, which has a plant 1 hour south of me, or a Subaru which has a plant in Indiana, I am supporting non-union jobs in this country. The money at the top is going to somewhere overseas, but people that high up aren't really my concern. It seems I support American workers no matter what car I buy.
But its a moot point, since I'll never buy a new car anyway. I always buy used.
Congress is worried about cheaters, what a concept.....:2razz:
I can think of easier, faster ways to ruin the engines, running it with no oil and no water alone is enough.
My family, all 3 of them were there, ran one of our cars without water and it warped the head of a Mopar slant 6, an almost indestructible engine. They called me and asked what to do after a hose started leaking, and I told them to get a ride home and I would deal with it after work. Instead, some guy told them it would be OK to drive it home. Why bother calling me if you are just going to take the advice of a complete stranger?
Pistons are aluminum, some small steel pellets poured into the intake of a fast running engine would destroy the pistons and score the cylinder walls.
That should be enough....
Or we could just..I don't know...NOT destroy the cars