Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Why increase the ranks of hungry people? The super rich wouldn't go hungry. The whole middle class would.

It would have been nice if the electorate was smart enough to understand what happened and decided to completely redo our financial system by electing people who would carry that out. But that wouldn't be fair. What if they were the rich ones?

TM

I may be wrong, but I think if the banking system had collapsed, it would have been the super rich that would have been fucked. The Fed could have come in the day after the collapse, picked up the good pieces, pulled them together, and sold that off to someone else, subject to a lot more supervision.

I don't know too many middle class folks who were over-invested in CDOs and credit default swaps. I don't think most of them would have felt a thing. But that's easy for me to say, because it didn't happen. I acknowledge that.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I don't think the argument was or is about saying that there are some Muslims doing bad shit and teaching others that it's okay to do bad shit in the name of Allah. That is crystal clear and undisputable. What I was picking up in the discourse, and if I was misinterpreting, I'm sorry and I'll take it all back, was the suggestion that there was something inherent in Islam, unique to any other religious following, that was encouraging or nurturing that teaching.

Again, if I was reading too much into what anyone said, I'm sorry.

I think between you and me there was a disconnect. If the conversation started with, "Why is there evidence of a significant number of muslims voicing support for crazy shit like, one deserves death if you bad-mouth the prophet?" The next step isn't Islam is flawed and muslims are bad. But why can't that question be asked and answers discussed without it morphing into conversations about a bunch of other shit?

I understand why Maher couldn't ask the question. He constantly criticizes Islam (and religion generally), has said some ignorant shit, and people are too angry to hear the question when he asks it because it seems like it's packed with all sorts of implications about muslims in general. But can't we discuss it amongst ourselves without devolving into Islam haters vs. Islam apologists?

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I may be wrong, but I think if the banking system had collapsed, it would have been the super rich that would have been fucked. The Fed could have come in the day after the collapse, picked up the good pieces, pulled them together, and sold that off to someone else, subject to a lot more supervision.

I don't know too many middle class folks who were over-invested in CDOs and credit default swaps. I don't think most of them would have felt a thing. But that's easy for me to say, because it didn't happen. I acknowledge that.

I don't think that's how it would work. If the next bank fails, there's a run on banks. If multiple banks fail, the money is gone, not just the CDOs and credit default swaps. The banks used your money to gamble on those products. And the FDIC wasn't created to insure every person's money from every single bank. And if the US system goes down, the world system goes down.

TM

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I was thinking about short term prejudice, like in reaction to some event, and whether a blurted out statement is forgivable or, ignorable maybe-

October 2001 I saw David Sedaris reading stories. He was living in Paris at the time and talking about how on edge he felt in a city with a large Islamic population as the US was gearing up to do war. He said "Frankly, I think we should turn the entire Middle East into a parking lot." If you don't know his work, this was not in keeping with his normal views.

A few years I saw him read again and by then he had dropped his original position and was hating on W for keeping wars going. This was much more in line with what I'd have expected from him.

And on one level, after 9/11 you might forgive, or understand, an extremely nasty statement as not indicative of a person's feelings. But on another level even fantasizing about mass genocide of entire populations seems to evidence a basic hate that might be normally kept hidden.

I still read his books. Should I?

My general view is that 9/11 was sufficiently shocking that everyone gets a grace period for shit they said. The period lasts anywhere from a couple of weeks to a few months depending on how "close" they were (not just geographically, but including whether they lost someone, etc.). They don't need to apologize for that, just show by their words an actions that it was an aberration.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Today, and in recent years, violent extremists that find their inspiration and justification in religion are largely Muslim.

Statements like this lead to all the counterexamples. See above.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Well, as long as you realize it, that's what's important, Bubbelleh.

I truly hope and will assume that was a jest. I fear it wasn't, but such is life.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I don't think that's how it would work. If the next bank fails, there's a run on banks. If multiple banks fail, the money is gone, not just the CDOs and credit default swaps. The banks used your money to gamble on those products. And the FDIC wasn't created to insure every person's money from every single bank. And if the US system goes down, the world system goes down.

TM

I think it would have been cheaper in the long run to make every pensioner, homeowner, and small business whole.

And we would be reading about Jamie Dimon going to jail instead of reading this.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I may be wrong, but I think if the banking system had collapsed, it would have been the super rich that would have been fucked. The Fed could have come in the day after the collapse, picked up the good pieces, pulled them together, and sold that off to someone else, subject to a lot more supervision.

I don't know too many middle class folks who were over-invested in CDOs and credit default swaps. I don't think most of them would have felt a thing. But that's easy for me to say, because it didn't happen. I acknowledge that.

It's not the first order effects, its the shockwaves it causes. When Uncle Wayne's Hardware closes shop because it no longer line of credit and can't pay suppliers and employees, that's not going to hurt the super rich.

Those with a cushion would be fine. Those on the margins lose jobs and homes.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I truly hope and will assume that was a jest. I fear it wasn't, but such is life.

Sorry, I forgot to turn on my Facetious Siren. I thought the "Bubbelleh" was clear enough.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Adder

It's not the first order effects, its the shockwaves it causes. When Uncle Wayne's Hardware closes shop because it no longer line of credit and can't pay suppliers and employees, that's not going to hurt the super rich.

Those with a cushion would be fine. Those on the margins lose jobs and homes.

The investor group that came in the next day, or two days later, and bought all the solid assets, with a partial government guarantee, would have been happy to keep Uncle Wayne's line of credit open. They would have been making a decent return on his L/C without having to pay some B-school grad fresh out of Wharton $250K plus bonus his first year to buy shit and call it Shine-ola.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Gang rapes and mutilation are as much a part of the ISIS arsenal as anyone else's. They are practicing savagery on a massive scale and that is a big component of their strategy. They are inhuman savages undeserving of any quarter, much as they offer none to their opponents.

Don't let a good point get dragged down by offering any sort of support for those assholes.

I offer no support to ISIS of course and you know that.

What do you think of Assad? He's a secularist, of course, but there are many people right now stuck between Assad and ISIS, with a choice of where to seek safety.

[taxwonk]

This.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I offer no support to ISIS of course and you know that.

What do you think of Assad? He's a secularist, of course, but there are many people right now stuck between Assad and ISIS, with a choice of where to seek safety.

It's easy for me to say, because I am thousands of miles away, and will stay safe, but between the two, I'd choose Assad for now. Once ISIS is dealt with, there will be a chance to take care of Assad. If they make the other choice, they will never dislodge ISIS.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Statements like this lead to all the counterexamples. See above.

Counterexamples would be helpful if I said "exclusively" rather than "largely". I did not.

That should be clear, but I think your view, that you are no longer interested in trying to convince anyone, means you also are no longer interested in actually reading, or giving honest consideration to, what anyone says that is contrary to what you believe.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

It's easy for me to say, because I am thousands of miles away, and will stay safe, but between the two, I'd choose Assad for now. Once ISIS is dealt with, there will be a chance to take care of Assad. If they make the other choice, they will never dislodge ISIS.

It appears that over the last year more people living there made the opposite choice. I think that choice had more to do with survival than Islam, myself. Over the last few years, Assad's Syria has been a place where random barrels of gas explode, leaving everyone in a neighborhood to die a wretched death, and after a few years and over a 100,000 bodies, they may have been ready for any choice at all.