Obama might be the dumbest president we have ever had.

[Final-Fan]

TheRealMafoo said:

Final-Fan said:

TheRealMafoo said:

Final-Fan said:

TheRealMafoo said:

akuma587 said:
Mafoo needs a tin foil hat.

Interestingly enough, economists have really been scrambling recently to figure out if they know anything at all about the economy. Economic crises are usually great for moving economic theory forward. It had gotten pretty stagnant. Everyone was buying into the same economic theories until the bottom fell out. Economists at first had no idea why things had even gone wrong.

Too much activism by the Fed.
Too much reliance on the market as a rational decision maker.
Too little taxation during good economic years (keeps the bubbles from getting too big and helps the national debt).
Too little regulation and oversight of most of the economy, particularly the financial sector.
Too much overextension of credit (highly related to point #1).

Have you never listened to Ron Paul? Everything he said would happen, happened. He is not the only one who predicted this YEARS before it happened.

1.  Source?
2.  You know what they say about broken clocks...

This is before the bailouts, before Fanny and Freddy.

That was completely off topic.  It's a seven minute rant about inflation, with a couple throwaway remarks about "the housing bubble" and "the NASDAQ bubble" only as a comparison to say that "the dollar bubble" (which according to him was about to burst) would be 10x worse.  He also says we need LESS regulation on the market when there AFAIK is a general consensus that deregulation resulted in the securitization scheme that caused the housing market to collapse. 

In short, I regard that as a complete failure to prove your assertion.

So the part where he said Soon Freddy, Fanny, and the banks are going to come to congress, ask for money, and the Feds are just going to print it up and give it to them means nothing to you?

That the people who are going to get the money first when it has purchasing power is Banks, Wall-street, but when that money enters circulation, inflation is going to hit, and tax everyone, the poor the most, didn't ring a bell at all? (inflation is on the rise, and won't stop for some time)

How about the part where soon the US is going to try to centrally regulate the economy, and that it's not going to work?

I guess you and I watched a different video.

(1) He said: 
...
Because at the rate we're going, we resort daily on inflating the money supply:  no matter who gets into trouble, the federal reserve opens up the line of credit, the banks come, freddie mac, fannie mae come, and also the congress goes to the fed, we run up the deficits -- all the pressure is put on the dollar. 

And in the last 35 years or so, since the breakdown of (brettin woods??) agreement, we have had a buildup of a dollar bubble.  We've heard about the housing bubble, and the NASDAQ bubble, and the various bubbles that burst and then we go through a period of suffering.  But what we're witnessing now is the beginning of the bursting of the dollar bubble, where there's loss of confidence.  We can't get away with continuing to just create new money. 
...
(my own transcription)

To argue after the fact that he was referring to a bailout is ... not something that I will believe without more an example of something more specific.  Greenspan's Fed made a habit of lowering interest rates everytime clouds covered up the sun, let alone if there was rain.  What makes you so sure he wasn't referring to this or some other thing? 

(2) I understood that to be referring to the general "use it or lose it" phenomenon of money in an inflating environment.  Spending, investing, etc. and the only ones that really lose are those who put it in a mattress or otherwise earn a return smaller than inflation on their money.  This would not be specifically referring to 'banks get the money, then businesses, and so on until the poor are left with inflated dregs'. 

(3) Ron Paul has, unless I am greatly mistaken, been on about encroaching govenment power for DECADES.  Does that make him right when it actually happens?  Yes.  Should I be amazed at his wisdom?  No. 

P.S.  Thanks for telling me where to find the tiny, tiny relevant parts in the seven minute speech.