22 replies to this topic

[Shady]

Good news for the U.S. economy and the world economy. Help is on the way, in just a few more months.

Academics predict economy will drive a Romney victory

Campaign 2012 may have spent weeks stuck on discussions of Mitt Romney’s taxes, Joe Biden’s rant on putting “y’all in chains” and “legitimate rape” and abortion, but a pair of Colorado political scientists believe the struggling economy will still be the dominant issue and will pave the way for a Romney victory.

Using a state-by-state analysis of unemployment and per-capita income, academics Kenneth Bickers and Michael Berry of the University of Colorado project that Romney will win 52.9% of the popular vote and 320 electoral votes.

You're probably asking, how does their model fit with past presidential elections?

The academics said their model focuses on the preeminent issue of the economy. Applied retrospectively, the model predicts the correct winner in every presidential contest going back to 1980.

LA Times

I hope they're right. It will mean a lot for the American economy, but especially to our economy, seeing as though we're so dependent on a strong U.S. consumer base. Keep your fingers crossed!

[kimmy]

Good news for the U.S. economy and the world economy. Help is on the way, in just a few more months.

Great news for the Americans who need help the most: the Koch brothers, the Lehman brothers, General Electric Corporation, and Ann Romney's dancing horse!

#HeckuvajobWillard!

-k

[BubberMiley]

Much like polls, science is a scam to be scoffed at---unless it tells you what you want to hear.

[Shady]

Great news for the Americans who need help the most: the Koch brothers, the Lehman brothers, General Electric Corporation, and Ann Romney's dancing horse!

#HeckuvajobWillard!

-k

Complete nonsense. Btw, Lehman Brothers went out of business in '08, and General Electric pays ZERO taxes under Obama!

#HeckuvaJobKimmy

/facepalm
Ignorance is bliss.

Edited by Shady, 22 August 2012 - 08:05 PM.

[CANADIEN]

Good news for the U.S. economy and the world economy. Help is on the way, in just a few more months.

Good news indeed. Rejoice, things are gonna get very good... until banks are given free rein to screw up the economy once again, which will come very very quickly.

[Shady]

Good news indeed. Rejoice, things are gonna get very good... until banks are given free rein to screw up the economy once again, which will come very very quickly.

Actually, it was government intervention that screwed up the economy. Lowering lending standards as to facilitate home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. You know, to help lower income folks. It's the kind of policy people like kimmy want more of. Luckily in Canada we've done the opposite, we've actually strengthened mortgage standards.

[j44]

Good news indeed. Rejoice, things are gonna get very good... until banks are given free rein to screw up the economy once again, which will come very very quickly.

Actually, it was government intervention that screwed up the economy. Lowering lending standards as to facilitate home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. You know, to help lower income folks. It's the kind of policy people like kimmy want more of. Luckily in Canada we've done the opposite, we've actually strengthened mortgage standards.

Actually, it was both.

[Shady]

Actually, it was both.

Not really. Banks weren't given free rein. The banking industry is one of the most highly regulated industries. The biggest problem was the lowering of lending standards, and the government's insistance on promoting home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. And of course the federal reserve for keeping interest rates artifically low for an extended period of time. Yes, government served everybody well with those policies.

[CANADIEN]

Actually, it was government intervention that screwed up the economy. Lowering lending standards as to facilitate home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. You know, to help lower income folks. It's the kind of policy people like kimmy want more of. Luckily in Canada we've done the opposite, we've actually strengthened mortgage standards.

Yeah yeah... there was no reckless behaviour by bankers, especially American ones.

Interestingly enough, stricter banking regulations here resulted in the meltdown affecting us less, relatively speaking, than other countries. Repear after me Shady... thank you Mr. Martin.

[j44]

Not really. Banks weren't given free rein. The banking industry is one of the most highly regulated industries. The biggest problem was the lowering of lending standards, and the government's insistance on promoting home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. And of course the federal reserve for keeping interest rates artifically low for an extended period of time. Yes, government served everybody well with those policies.

Are you saying the banks are blameless?

[kimmy]

Actually, it was government intervention that screwed up the economy. Lowering lending standards as to facilitate home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. You know, to help lower income folks. It's the kind of policy people like kimmy want more of. Luckily in Canada we've done the opposite, we've actually strengthened mortgage standards.

The banks dished out way more sub-prime mortgages than any government quota system required them to, and they did it because financial deregulation combined with an extreme lack of ethics made it highly profitable for them to do so.

-k

[msj]

Not really. Banks weren't given free rein. The banking industry is one of the most highly regulated industries. The biggest problem was the lowering of lending standards, and the government's insistance on promoting home ownership to people that wouldn't otherwise qualify. And of course the federal reserve for keeping interest rates artifically low for an extended period of time. Yes, government served everybody well with those policies.

That's right folks, the government both regulates the banks "highly" and lowered lending standards (at the same time!) so that those same banks just couldn't help themselves as they jumped off the cliff with all the other lemmings.

Just like the inaccurate story of lemmings jumping off the cliff, Shady is, surprise! lying (yes, lying) about this:

Did Affordable Housing Legislation Contribute to the Subprime Securities Boom?

Dissecting the big lie about the economic crisis Plus Charts.

Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)

The Subprime Crisis: Is Government Housing Policy to Blame?

Wallison and the three “des” – Deregulation, Desupervision and De Facto Decriminalization


I know Shady isn`t going to read a single one of those links but others will.

[CANADIEN]

The banks dished out way more sub-prime mortgages than any government quota system required them to, and they did it because financial deregulation combined with an extreme lack of ethics made it highly profitable for them to do so.

-k

There is no doubt that easy access to mortgages, extended beyond what was reasonable, was a factor in the crisis. But some U.S. banks wanted sub-prime mortages. Recklesssly, they kept piling bad mortgages upon bad mortgages. They kept encouraging people who they ought to know would not be able to meet the payments to get those mortgages. They didn't say "OK, more home ownership is fine, but this is too risky". Considering the level of influence they have on law-makers, they could have called for more prudent policies regarding mortgages, but instead they kept pushing and pushing for less and less regulations.

Sure, any person who took a mortgage he/she knew, or ought to have known, they would not be able to pay is responsbile for his/her misfortune. But banks that recklessly pile bad debts upon bad debts share a far, far greater responsability for screwing the world's economy.

[kimmy]

I know Shady isn`t going to read a single one of those links but others will.

Thanks!

Much of this information is over my head, but I get the impression that the gist of it is that Shady is full of it.

-k

[Topaz]

Since its a know fact that US past elections have been "controlled" by other sources and not mainly by the voters, who ever of the two candidate agree more to the world's elitist, or power's that be, will get the White House.