dow 26000

1989

Well-Known Member
i like turtles




F71FC672-4F45-4E8F-B051-D35B9A0F4049.jpeg
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
Money will always move to better opportunities. The market has been that opportunity for a long time.
what are you trying to say? pro free markets?

if the govt didnt do anything, then we wouldve had a depression. but they shouldnt have bailed out the banks.

in part they shouldve reregulated the banks, wiped off bad mortgages for the people, created public banks.
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
There’s no money in stagnation. The money is always in the bull and bear markets. Let freedom ring.


View attachment 216821
markets arent as efficient as you make them out to be

capitalism by itself drives towards monopoly

its unrealistic to think that govt would have left it to free markets anyways; the economy has never worked that way.
 
Last edited:

1989

Well-Known Member
what are you trying to say? pro free markets?

if the govt didnt do anything, then we wouldve had a depression. but they shouldnt have bailed out the banks.

in part they shouldve reregulated the banks, wiped off bad mortgages for the people, created public banks.
We have plenty of credit unions. So now you want to undo people’s contractual obligations. That is a poor president to establish. The banks should be paying mucho interest on their bailout money.
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
We have plenty of credit unions. So now you want to undo people’s contractual obligations. That is a poor president to establish. The banks should be paying mucho interest on their bailout money.
credit unions are not the same thing. and you have only 1 public bank which has performed amazingly.
 

Brownslave688

You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
what are you trying to say? pro free markets?

if the govt didnt do anything, then we wouldve had a depression. but they shouldnt have bailed out the banks.

in part they shouldve reregulated the banks, wiped off bad mortgages for the people, created public banks.
We would have had a deeper cut and a quicker recovery.


They should have let the mega banks fail. There were plenty of regional and smaller banks that could have taken over the pieces
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
We would have had a deeper cut and a quicker recovery.


They should have let the mega banks fail. There were plenty of regional and smaller banks that could have taken over the pieces
no we recovered quicker bc of govt intervention. im not saying what the govt did was right.

i agree about letting the big banks fail, but im not sure about the second part.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
The truth is there isn't much credit or blame to be had.
That’s not exactly true. The market is spooked by the Fed and their return to raising interest rates and the specter of inflation.

These are the same two things that the administration was warned about before the tax cuts...you know, the ones that aren’t paying for themselves.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
That’s not exactly true. The market is spooked by the Fed and their return to raising interest rates and the specter of inflation.

These are the same two things that the administration was warned about before the tax cuts...you know, the ones that aren’t paying for themselves.
Federal revenue is way up.
 
Top