patrick.net

Rew says

The Dodd-Frank Act is a disastrous policy that's hindering our markets, reducing the availability of credit

The God Damned interest rates have been so high these last 8 yrs. If they were lower, I'd have started at least 5 businesses by now. We need more credit, for fuck's sake.

YesYNot says

I'd have started at least 5 businesses by now

what type of business/businesses do you currently own?

The rural Republican voters don't realize they are FUBAR.

Why would you compare the DJIA to Dodd Frank? Non Sequitur

YesYNot says

The God Damned interest rates have been so high these last 8 yrs. If they were lower, I'd have started at least 5 businesses by now. We need more credit, for fuck's sake.

I know right? Demand is through the roof, but no-one can get past all the stifling Government regulation to do anything.
MABA!

indigenous says

Why would you compare the DJIA to Dodd Frank? Non Sequitur

Chief Pyrotechnical Engineer Spicer says

The Dodd-Frank Act is a disastrous policy that's hindering our markets ...

It's Spicer's justification for deregulation.

indigenous says

Non Sequitur

We will not be havin" a logical progression of thought!

HEY YOU says

The rural Republican voters don't realize they are FUBAR.

Who is Dodd and Frank?

Dodd and Frank "retired" after they passed this bill and because of their huge fuck ups in the finance of housing.

Rew says

The Dodd-Frank Act is a disastrous policy that's hindering our markets ...

That part is correct

Rew says

MABA : Make America Blow (Bubbles) Again : Dodd-Frank

This thread's title is false advertisement. This thread should be about blowjobs and how to make American women give more of them.

Dan, that's a forthcuming piece by Rin I believe.

indigenous says

That part is correct

Care to back that up with anything of substance? Spicer's word good enough for you right?
Trump: "Believe me. Believe me."

Don't know the paticulars, in general there is way too much regulation. And Dodd Frank does very to regulate the very mechanism that cogributed to the bubble.

Dodd-Frank was a lobbyist paid political scapegoating. The real culprit was the government, but lenders (except Wells) cooperated wholeheartedly in the service of large commissions. Dodd-Frank managed to deflect the blame and responsibility from lenders to brokers.

No broker ever created a loan program. No broker ever wrote loan guidelines. No broker ever gave a loan underwriting approval.

Oh I'm sorry Wogster I don't think you are an ideologue at all, you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Frank Dodd is written by the big banks for the big banks. Its garbage. Reinstate Glass Steigel, dump DF

Rew says

Care to back that up with anything of substance? Spicer's word good enough for you right?

Indegionous doesn't need spicer. It's true because I believe it should be true is good enough.

bob2356 says

Indegionous doesn't need spicer. It's true because I believe it should be true is good enough.

Tell us what is in Dodd Frank then.

Reminder: Mary Jo White and the rest of Obama's Wristslap Regulators and White Shoe Law Firm Wall Street Defense Attorneys never finalized the Dodd-Frank Rules.

https://www.ft.com/content/4af58f2a-91a0-11e6-a72e-b428cb934b78

T L Lipsovich says

Reminder

Trump isn't going to finalize them either.

Your're making shit up

indigenous says

Your're making shit up

The all caps. Ohhhh please let him actually tweet in all caps once.

MMR says

YesYNot says

I'd have started at least 5 businesses by now

what type of business/businesses do you currently own?

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/sarcasm

Heres Your Card says

indigenous says

Your're making shit up

You open your mouth like that and I will show you what that holds.

An anonymous post pointing out sarcasm to MMR.

Indigenous engaging Heres Your Card.

Oh man. Loving Pnet right now. Hilarious.

indigenous says

Heres Your Card says

indigenous says

Your're making shit up

You open your mouth like that and I will show you what that holds.

Rew says

Hilarious.

Absolutely, the Wogster provocating until he can justify triggering and hoping nobody will call his bullshit because of his temper tantrums, and wanting to secure his best prognosticator on pat net status.

Then there is Bob and wanting to show the non sequiturs of everybody never stopping to think that he projects his own.

The rest sequestered by their own delusions of big evil companies.

indigenous says

Big companies always want more regulations as regulation eliminates competition from companies that can't afford to comply with the regulations.

indigenous says

Just record amounts of spending on lobbyists and better access to regulators, somehow you think the banks are going to want regulations that are going to weaken their position?

You are seriously arguing corporations are spending close to 4 billion in 2015 lobbying for more regulations?

This is your brain on mises.

bob2356 says

You are seriously arguing corporations are spending close to 4 billion in 2015 lobbying for more regulations?

Amongst other things, that is a fact.

ADM would not make a dime from ethanol if not for regulations.

A taxi medallion in NYC cost around 500k, this is in order to keep independants out of NYC.

McDonalds, Starbucks and Kraft have spent millions of dollars lobbying for food “safety” regulation bills.

Here is an article at the top of a google search

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/big-corporations-and-big-government-go-hand-hand

indigenous says

Amongst other things, that is a fact.

ADM would not make a dime from ethanol if not for regulations.

A taxi medallion in NYC cost around 500k, this is in order to keep independants out of NYC.

McDonalds, Starbucks and Kraft have spent millions of dollars lobbying for food “safety” regulation bills.

Corporations lobby to make proposed regulations more favourable, that's not at all the same thing as lobbying for regulations. The vast majority of lobbying is to roll back regulations, get subsidies, get contracts, or to get tax breaks.

ADM didn't make a dime off of regulations. The clean air act mandated oxygenated gasoline to reduce pollution in 1970. MTBE was used until it was discovered polluting groundwater. Ethanonal was substituted. The ethanol mandate requiring 10% ethanol was a a law passed by congress, not a regulation. Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub.L. 109–58). Sorry you don't know the difference between laws passed by congress and regulations.

Lobbying for regulations like vaping. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/05/tobacco-companies-lost-the-fight-against-new-e-cigarette-regulations-in-2009/
Like the fight for more fracking regulations. http://prospect.org/article/why-its-so-hard-regulate-fracking
yadda, yadda, yadda

Which food safety regulations stamp out the competition pray tell? They spent a lot more lobbying for subsidies for things like corn and soybeans, the backbone of the fast food industry.

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass. Maybe you can provide the facts of how much lobbying money is spent on the different ways to influence government? Oh wait all lobbying is spent on asking for more regulations, I forgot.

This is your brain on mises.

Sure, and the 500k taxi medallions, banking regulations that have contributed to local bank failures, food regulations to small farmers?

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass.

Your brain on centralized government

indigenous says

Sure, and the 500k taxi medallions, banking regulations that have contributed to local bank failures, food regulations to small farmers?

You said all lobbying was for more regulations not me. I never said there was no lobbying for industry protection either. As usual you added 2+2 and came up negative pi. Some lobbying is for influencing regulations and laws to protect against competition, most isn't. A vast majority of lobbying money is to influence congress writing laws. Eliminating regulatory agencies and the people who write regulations which are in the executive branch not the legislative branch, would have zero effect on congress writing laws or lobbying influence in congress. And would be impossible anyway, someone has to administer the laws. But you don't know the difference between a law and a regulation anyway so this is all beyond you.

I once very reluctantly spent 2-3 days a week in DC as the technical consultant to our regulatory liaison (the person keeping up with laws and regs pertaining to our industry, not lobbying) for 4 years. I was also on the industry advisory committee charged with providing technical recommendations for the DOE electronic records project for 3 years. I sat through lots of agency meetings, congressional hearings, rubber chicken dinners, cocktail hours (where lobbying and lawmaking really happens), met with lots of aides, some congressmen, and an occasional senator. You can trust me when I tell you from personal experience the vast majority of lobbying is in congress and it's not for more regulations.

But If the only tool you have is a hammer (or in your case platitudes from mises.org) , everything looks like a nail.

Yet you avoid the previous points.

In reality the regulators are the 4 th branch of government and commingle with business too morph and create regulations that favor the business. Both parties are following their self interest the regulator to build an empire and the business too keep out competition.

indigenous says

Big companies always want more regulations as regulation eliminates competition from companies that can't afford to comply with the regulations.

indigenous says

Just record amounts of spending on lobbyists and better access to regulators,

indigenous says

bob2356 says

You are seriously arguing corporations are spending close to 4 billion in 2015 lobbying for more regulations?

Amongst other things, that is a fact.

indigenous says

Yet you avoid the previous points.

Those previous posts where you claim all lobbying is at the agencies for more regulations? What a joke you are. I'm out of here.

Bobby is pouting, because someone does agree with his narrative.

indigenous says

Squawk mises says, Squawk mises says, Squawk polly want a cracker.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/business/economy/in-new-congress-wall-st-pushes-to-undermine-dodd-frank-reform.html?_r=0
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/02/how_the_banks_and_republicans_plan_to_kill_financial_reform_under_trump.html
https://www.thenation.com/article/how-wall-street-defanged-dodd-frank/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-banks-volcker-idUSKBN14O0EH
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/banking/article20589309.html

So the large banks are spending millions lobbying to get dodd-frank repealed because they are really like dodd-frank and don't want it repealed. Too funny.

This is your brain on mises. Squawk. Squawk.

bob2356 says

Squawk mises says, Squawk mises says, Squawk polly want a cracker.

Bobby says ad hom ad hom ad hom

Consider transportation. At the behest of local taxi cartels, cities across the country have tried to regulate upstart Uber—a new, electronic car-hailing service—out of their markets. Uber’s sin is to offer transportation that many customers consider superior to that of the existing cab industry. Chicago claims the company violates pricing disclosure and safety regulations. San Francisco claims the company violates insurance regulations. Boston and New York have issued cease-and-desist orders. Never mind that Uber’s customers like the service so much that they willingly pay more to use Uber than to use city-sanctioned taxis.

New York City’s sugary drink ban — originally set to go into effect Tuesday, but held up by state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling Jr. — offers another example. Mayor Bloomberg insists the ban will help to reduce obesity. That’s not why large retailers love it, though. It turns out that the ban is good for big business. While it’s illegal for the person running a hotdog cart to sell you a large Coke, the 7-11 next door can sell you a Big Gulp. Starbucks gets special treatment too, as the ban arbitrarily exempts certain drinks containing “milk and milk substitutes.” Yet, the coffee chain’s 20-oz peppermint white chocolate mocha (legal) contains almost 50 percent more sugar than a 20-oz Coke (illegal).

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/12/davies-and-mccarl-how-big-business-benefits-regula/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/02/28/economy-health-businesses-entrepreneurship-column/22590839/

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/11/why-businesses-love-regulatory-complexity

Bobby says Squawk Squawk Squawk