Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RMF who wrote (73337)	10/10/2009 11:09:15 AM
From: SGJ	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224738

You didn't have banks carrying TRILLIONS in derivatives back then. So what. Why is trillions bad? Indirectly this is a indicator that the economy has grown too. Which is good if you depend on a thriving economy for anything.

To: RMF who wrote (73337)	10/14/2009 11:58:14 AM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224738

You didn't have trillions of dollars for anything since a dollar was worth more and because the economy was much smaller. You did have a large number of failed banks, runs on banks, other serious finical issues, then you added price controls and other sorts of stupid intrusive regulation, destruction of agricultural products, pressure to keep wages up when unemployment was high and demand was low, tariff increases, tax increases, very high marginal tax rates and all sorts of other things that made the downturn worse, and longer. This downturn makes all the previous ones, including 1982, 1932 and 1873 look like "small potatoes". We'll throw in 1907 too. It's not just "my argument" it's the FACTS. No its just some bizarre alternate reality you live in.