Does quantitative easing really work?

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by Bic_Cherry, May 8, 2018.

  1. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10,299
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that's precisely what I mean.

    But if you don't like that, then I have an alternative idea. Make it illegal to bail out such stupid capitalist depositors when the can't get their money back from their capitalist banker when the loans go south.
     
    squidward likes this.
  2. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They're still on the books of the FED
     
  3. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Private banks were so wreckless that they might cause a massive depression and you think the only solution was to reward them.
    You call yourself a capitalist? Too funny
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2018
    Longshot likes this.
  4. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why is a capitalist so eager the have government prop up failed entities?
    Socialist much?
     
    Longshot likes this.
  5. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    3,356
    Likes Received:
    389
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    The last one was caused by a Replicant Administration, and handed on a silver-platter to Dem Administration.

    Which did solve the immediate problem (of employment) - but not the long-term matter of the inadequacy of today's American work-force to provide the kind of qualified individuals that our present market-economy is needing.

    As I never tire of telling. Wakey, wakey! The Industrial Age has passed on and we are now in the Information Age ...



    Yes, as regards politics-in-America you are quite right.

    But the problem lies with the fact that most Americans do not learn about how this country is run in a Civics Class. Where was it ever covered in YOUR CLASS

    the historical relevancy of the Electoral College - that is, the why and how it became a central piece of the Constitution without which the southern-states were refusing to sign it!

    Because in the latter part of the 18th century, when America was born, the prevailing age was "Agricultural". And slavery was the mainstay input to the production of cotton without which the southern states had no real "industry".

    Which is why they insisted on the manipulation of the popular-vote by the Electoral College that consistently gives southern states more of a voting-edge regarding the selection of the PotUS. Of the first twelve presidents only three are from the "north", all the rest beginning with Washington (from Virginia) were from southern states.

    PS: And then, there is also the matter of "gerrymandering" voting districts - which comes from the same frame-of-time. That is, around 1812 when it was first used in Massachusetts. (And there is also the matter of how "commercial publicity" is able to manipulate votes as well - both of which are other subjects for another time.
     
  6. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    3,356
    Likes Received:
    389
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Get rid of the FDIC and all hell will break loose. From here:
    Which means "ordinary people" (and obviously not you) would have their property seized to recover any negative bank account. Moreover, when push comes to shove as it did in the SubPrime Mess then a lot more people get hurt if they have accounts with banks that have failed.

    So, you are suggesting that the insurance be disallowed to punish those banks who "go negative" because of too much lending. And I suggest that we solve the problem of wildfire real-estate lending at the very beginning by punishing banks that show unsubstantiated "quality-control" of borrowers.

    For instance, showing that you are still employed and proving your revenue source by showing current pay-slips or bank accounts of your revenue-business. Showing your last tax-filing document? Etc., etc. etc.

    Wouldn't an improved selection-process of borrowers be better for bank solvency and less of a general threat to the economy ... ?
     
  7. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    perhaps you should read about Brooksley Born.
     
  8. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10,299
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You completely overlooked half of my solution, which was to make fractional reserve banking illegal.
     
  9. Wildjoker5

    Wildjoker5 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,674
    Likes Received:
    959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hope this has been brought up, but inflation of price of good, IS deflation of your currency. Also, Venezuela tried printing money, now I can spend $10 and but enough Venezuelan currency to wipe my arse with for the next 2 years.
     
  10. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    3,356
    Likes Received:
    389
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    When will you ever learn that one-liners are "fractional" in real debate?

    Explain yourself, if you can ...
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018 at 7:58 AM
  11. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You understand fractional reserve banking, no?
     
    Longshot likes this.
  12. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10,299
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fractional reserve banking sets up the impossible situation of two different parties (the depositor and the bank) having sole ownership to the the exact same dollar. It is inherently unstable and puts the depositor at risk. It should be eliminated. Once it's eliminated, there would no longer be need for the FDIC.
     
  13. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10,299
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And yes, I know the highlighted section is not legally accurate. The depositor no longer owns the dollar. And that, in itself, is why fractional reserve banking should be made illegal.
     
  14. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The government has now allowed the banks to reclassify depositors as unsecured creditors. Isn't that special?
     
    Longshot likes this.
  15. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10,299
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not just now. This is the way it has always been, legally. A deposit is considered a loan to the bank and becomes the bank's property. The bank becomes a creditor to the depository.

    Here's an excerpt from an article in the Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law ( https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1391&context=jcfl )

    A client walks into a bank with the intention of depositing personal
    or business funds. The bank’s teller gladly accepts the deposit, credits
    the client’s account accordingly, and the client departs content that what
    transpired was an ordinary-course banking transaction. Simultaneously,
    however, a curious phenomenon occurs, one which effectively
    transforms the legal nature of the transaction into something very
    different from that which our unwary depositor intends. That curious
    phenomenon, which willfully ignores the nature of the deposit as
    understood by both parties, subverts the intentions of only one party.
    What the depositor intends to be in the nature of a bailment, the law
    transforms into a loan; where ordinary people expect a bailor-bailee
    relationship, the law creates a creditor and a debtor. Title to the
    deposited funds passes from the depositor to the bank, and usually only
    the bank knows it. Upon this legal transformation is built the leviathan
    that is the global banking system


    This is why fractional reserve should be made illegal. Bank deposits should be bailments, not loans. But the banks love the fact that the government has set up a situation where the middle class unwitting banks every last dollar they own.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018 at 2:35 PM
  16. danielpalos

    danielpalos Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    37,569
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I think full employment of resources in the market for labor can, "soak up" all of that printed money through unemployment compensation for being unemployed and circulating that money and creating more demand; when coupled with a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, gains in productivity and a positive multiplier effect will enable consumers to, "catch up" to the money supply.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018 at 2:46 PM
  17. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now the "loan" is unsecured, meaning the depositor is the last creditor in line to get paid
     
    Longshot likes this.
  18. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10,299
    Likes Received:
    1,022
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's funny how the state arranges it so that the bankers always win and the little guys get screwed.

    The insidious thing about the whole scam is that people don't even know they're loaning their money. The banks and the government do their best to keep that fact hidden. They think they're depositing it for safekeeping.

    How about a regulation that the word 'deposit' can never be used when it's actually a loan. Maybe that would help people wake up.

    And how about allowing people to set up legitimate bailment banks that are connected to the clearinghouses (paper and debit) to give people a no-risk alternative. Once those are up and running, announce the future elimination of FDIC, let everyone get their $250,000 of loaned money back, and then allow the market to decide between the two system of banking. And then after everyone's been given a chance to withdraw their money from the fractional reserve banks, shut down FDIC.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018 at 4:00 PM
  19. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The multiplying factor fell below 1 as of the 2008 crisis. Less than one dollar entered the economy for every dollar created by the FED.
     
  20. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    21,291
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein would be very upset with you
     
    Longshot likes this.

Share This Page