Hey, what does this latest rate hike mean?

[Shooter McGavin 618]

21 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

In legal matters, yes. There are probably many in your marriage. It’s legal or it isn’t. Loophole is a concept used to trick stupid people. 

Well it's pretty obvious that something is legal or isn't.  A loophole is something that is legal when the intent of the legislation was not to be.

[jonmx 2,487]

15 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Well it's pretty obvious that something is legal or isn't.  A loophole is something that is legal when the intent of the legislation was not to be.

Loopholes are often intentional, with the intent of the legislation to cover normal people while letting the wealthy and especially politicians off the hook.  

[Horseman 2,727]

17 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

1.) Yeah see Horseman (and HT) take it as Obama just ignored it until he was ready to go. He didn't. And even more- it isn't Obama himself looking for it- it's the team overall. But again- don't let facts get in the way of things. Also, you know- the whole point of it was for Wall Street to hide it and they did for a while.

2.) Trump in his campaign speeches talked about deregulation and doing away with Dodd-Frank. He at the very least weakened it while in office and deregulated these things. But again- don't let facts get in the way of things. 

You deny saying it was caught in 2016?    Because you said it twice:

5 hours ago, Sean Mooney said:

Regardless of when the problem was found in 2016, why was it never fixed?

The article says they didn't propose a fix until 2016:

Quote

 But one month after they proposed a rule to fix it, Trump won the presidency.

The link has proposed fixes dated 2012.  

Just admit you were drunk last night when you rambled on about this nonsense and take the L.  Man up, you said it the problem was found in 2016, twice.  It's right there in black and white.

 

[Horseman 2,727]

33 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

You said that Mooney said that Obama didn't notice it until 2016.  Mooney said they tried to fix it right before 2016.  If you read the article, the loophole was spotted in 2013.  Now shut up.

I'd say go take some English classes, but, there are some pretty terrible teachers out there.  Let me see if I can help.

Quote

The Obama team caught it and was trying to fix it but that was right before the 2016 election. 

What happened right before the 2016 election?  Answer: The Obama team caught it and was trying to fix it.

Quote

Regardless of when the problem was found in 2016, why was it never fixed?

When was the problem found?  Answer: 2016

Does that help senior?  English your second language or something?

[Shooter McGavin 618]

3 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Regardless of when the problem was found in 2016, why was it never fixed?

This sentence doesn't make any sense, I assumed it was a typo.

But if he said it was found in 2016, that is wrong, because the article doesn't state that.

If we try and get back to the original point, there is speculation going on that has increased inflation, and it hasn't been addressed.  All this other BS is nonsense, you trying to get someone, and it's pointless.

[Horseman 2,727]

24 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

This sentence doesn't make any sense, I assumed it was a typo.

But if he said it was found in 2016, that is wrong, because the article doesn't state that.

If we try and get back to the original point, there is speculation going on that has increased inflation, and it hasn't been addressed.  All this other BS is nonsense, you trying to get someone, and it's pointless.

The article says the proposed fix was 2016.  Their own link has Obama proposed fixes dated 2012.

Found or proposed, there is only one reason to try and say it happened right before Trump took office.  For the article and Mooney to try and lay blame.

I agree, Mooney should take the L and so should you for linking that garbage article and move on.  

[Hardcore troubadour 16,058]

1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Well it's pretty obvious that something is legal or isn't.  A loophole is something that is legal when the intent of the legislation was not to be.

So it’s legal. And it’s written and approved by lawyers and the courts. Loophole is a concept used to trick stupid people. 

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:

This sentence doesn't make any sense, I assumed it was a typo.

But if he said it was found in 2016, that is wrong, because the article doesn't state that.

If we try and get back to the original point, there is speculation going on that has increased inflation, and it hasn't been addressed.  All this other BS is nonsense, you trying to get someone, and it's pointless.

Here is what the article says that I was referring to. (My only mistake was using the phrasing I did. The problem was found in the spring of 2014. They formally addressed the fix in 2016.:

Quote

"In late 2016, the CFTC formally proposed new rules to close the footnote 563 loophole entirely. But by then it was October 18. The country was just three weeks away from President-elect Donald J. Trump."

This is the larger context. The bigger issue is Horseman continues to like to lie about things. 

Quote

 

It’s not clear who snitched, but the CFTC found out about this in the spring of 2014. A 2018 paper published by the Institute for New Economic Thinking concluded it was “likely” that the CFTC got “tipped off.” The author of that paper was Michael Greenberger, who once ran the CFTC’s Division of Trading and Markets and then founded the University of Maryland Center for Health and Homeland Security, where he’s now the director. In a 2019 followup piece for the Journal of Business & Technology Law, Greenberger wrote that the tip-off came in May 2014. Greenberger told me he believes someone from ISDA “let the cat out of the bag.”

Either way, the CFTC was slow to respond. Greenberger wrote that the agency “at first unknowingly, and then largely unquestioningly” let Wall Street’s biggest firms keep moving swaps “overseas.” At the time, Greenberger writes, 90 percent of the swaps market was controlled by Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America.

The swaps exodus had already begun to attract the attention of business journalists. The Wall Street Journal’s Katy Burne reported in April 2014 that the four financial firms, plus Morgan Stanley, were “changing the terms” of their offshore swaps units, “so they don't get caught by U.S. regulations.”

By the time the CFTC got their tip, Gensler was gone. And it wasn’t until November 2014, Greenberger writes, that CFTC Chair Tim Massad first raised questions. The CFTC did manage to close the loophole for one type of Dodd-Frank swaps regulation. But 12 other types still had Wall Street welcome mats out.

In late 2016, the CFTC formally proposed new rules to close the footnote 563 loophole entirely. But by then it was October 18. The country was just three weeks away from President-elect Donald J. Trump."

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:

This sentence doesn't make any sense, I assumed it was a typo.

But if he said it was found in 2016, that is wrong, because the article doesn't state that.

If we try and get back to the original point, there is speculation going on that has increased inflation, and it hasn't been addressed.  All this other BS is nonsense, you trying to get someone, and it's pointless.

Actually I guess the larger issue is we continue to argue this with a dolt and a person who hasn't read the article.

 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,058]

3 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Actually I guess the larger issue is we continue to argue this with a dolt and a person who hasn't read the article.

 

Again, can’t just own and discuss what you said. You do it all the time. 

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

17 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Again, can’t just own and discuss what you said. You do it all the time. 

Again- you can't read a simple article. You must be allergic to links. You avoid them all the time. 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,058]

10 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Again- you can't read a simple article. You must be allergic to links. You avoid them all the time. 

It’s the young Turks. And you didn’t even post it. Doesn’t matter, you’re unable to stand on your own. Beta. 

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s the young Turks. And you didn’t even post it. Doesn’t matter, you’re unable to stand on your own. Beta. 

Either way you've chosen the road of not reading the article yet commenting on the inner workings of it. You've exposed your ignorance. 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,058]

3 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Either way you've chosen the road of not reading the article yet commenting on the inner workings of it. You've exposed your ignorance. 

No I haven’t.  I commented on what you said. You’ve exposed your lack of comprehension, once again. 

[Horseman 2,727]

2 hours ago, Sean Mooney said:

My only mistake was using the phrasing I did. The problem was found in the spring of 2014.

That a boy.  Take the L even if it was poor phrasing from an English teacher. 

You by chance help write the legislation?  That might explain all the loopholes.

[KSB2424 3,174]

Multiple things can be true at once.  Historically economies ebb and flow, we were trending towards a dip in the economy eventually.  Then COVID hit, the federal government spent a ton of money to combat it, then we kept spending and kept locking economies down, and schools down.  Beaches and playgrounds were shut down for crying out loud, it killed our economy because it threw everything askew.  But the government kept the spending when all they had to do was open the country back up once we learned more which was only a few months later.  But there was an election, the MEDIA was all things COVID all the time so a politician has to address it.....wag the dog.

Fast forward a bit.  Liberal energy decisions....oil / gas / diesel all skyrocket which has an effect on most every industry.  That cost is passed down to the consumer, aka Econ 101.  Now we "Build Back Better", Jesus I just don't have the keystrokes in me for that.  

Cliff Notes:  Historically and with Covid we were probably headed for some sort of a correction, but Biden's policies poured straight gasoline (no pun intended) on the problem.  Turning a correction into a complete disaster. We're just in the beginning folks.  

[edjr 7,041]

3 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

Multiple things can be true at once.  Historically economies ebb and flow, we were trending towards a dip in the economy eventually.  Then COVID hit, the federal government spent a ton of money to combat it, then we kept spending and kept locking economies down, and schools down,  Beaches and Playgrounds were shut down, it killed our economy and the government kept the spending when all they had to do was open the country back up once we learned more which was only a few months later.  But there was an election, the MEDIA was all things covid all the time so a politician has to address it.....wag the dog.

Fast forward a bit.  Liberal energy decisions....oil / gas / diesel all skyrocket which has an effect on most every industry.  That cost is passed down to the consumer, aka Econ 101.  Now we "Build Back Better", Jesus I just don't have the keystrokes in me for that.  

Cliff Notes:  Historically and with Covid we were probably headed for some sort of a correction, but Biden's policies poured straight gasoline (no pun intended) on the problem.  Turning a correction into a complete disaster. We're just in the beginning folks.  

We sure are. Going to be a long, sad, hurtful ride. See you in hell.

[KSB2424 3,174]

On 11/2/2022 at 7:54 PM, TheNewGirl said:

You have a college degree; you have the ability to learn basic supply, demand, economics, and how the changes in interest rates affect YOU and the prices of items around you. It's not just about "buying a house." 

Banks now lend to each other and to businesses at higher rates - the cost of goods will go up as well. If it costs more money for me to make the test tubes that you use in your lab, I am going to charge you more when you order them. This in turn costs your lab more, and then next year when you're up for a raise, you may only get 2% instead of 10%, because the costs of doing business are more and they make cuts where it's easiest - your raises. 

Again, you don't have to go to school for this. Go get a book and teach your self how it works. It might help when the time to vote comes and "your guy" is saying that minimum wage should be $20/hour...you will make more informed decisions. 

This is so hot. 

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No I haven’t.  I commented on what you said. You’ve exposed your lack of comprehension, once again. 

Read the article...answer the questions I asked. Do anything besides repeat the same insipid stuff over and over. 

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

1 hour ago, edjr said:

We sure are. Going to be a long, sad, hurtful ride. See you in hell.

Where do we get in line to buy tickets?

[peenie 2,022]

19 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

This is so hot. 

Was it? It stinks of privilege. I’ve yet to find out the book she (he) read about supply and demand. If my guess is correct, TNG learned about how raising interests rates affect mortgages through direct experience or passively through seeing and listening not reading. 

I’m not a coward, I don’t hide behind multiple aliases. I admitted that I’m ignorant and asked a question. What a d-i-c-k move to point the finger back at me for not knowing about something I wasn’t taught in school and it isn’t directly talked about in detail in the news yet I am affected by. They speak on Bloomberg (for example) as if we all already know this stuff and I don’t. 

[Shooter McGavin 618]

5 minutes ago, peenie said:

Was it? It stinks of privilege. I’ve yet to find out the book she (he) read about supply and demand. If my guess is correct, TNG learned about how rates affect mortgages through direct experience or passively through seeing and listening not reading. 

You don't need a book.  You can google anything you want and gets loads of helpful information.

Here, I googled "How do rates affect mortgages"

And the first response I got looks pretty good...

https://www.bankrate.com/mortgages/federal-reserve-and-mortgage-rates/

You can keep googling and learning.  The internet is pretty good.

[peenie 2,022]

7 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

You don't need a book.  You can google anything you want and gets loads of helpful information.

Here, I googled "How do rates affect mortgages"

And the first response I got looks pretty good...

https://www.bankrate.com/mortgages/federal-reserve-and-mortgage-rates/

You can keep googling and learning.  The internet is pretty good.

Yes, Google is a personal friend, thanks, but we’ve met already. While I am aware I can consult Google, sometimes I don’t even know what I don’t know in order to ask Google, so human interaction is better than Google. 

And, that answer was confusing. The answer I received here was clear and to the point. 

[Strike 6,034]

1 minute ago, peenie said:

Yes, Google is a personal friend, thanks, but we’ve met already. While I am aware I can consult Google, sometimes I don’t even know what I don’t know in order to ask Google, so human interaction is better than Google. 

Just google whatever is in your head, get whatever information comes back, and refine your search.  I mean, you know enough to start a thread here.  Post the same thing in to google.  It's not that hard.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

46 minutes ago, peenie said:

Yes, Google is a personal friend, thanks, but we’ve met already. While I am aware I can consult Google, sometimes I don’t even know what I don’t know in order to ask Google, so human interaction is better than Google. 

And, that answer was confusing. The answer I received here was clear and to the point. 

My point was that if you want to learn about supply and demand, you don't need a book, you can use the internet.

[Strike 6,034]

Peenie,

  I find it hard to believe that you got out of college without taking an econ class.  I had to take two as part of my GE requirements.  I also took one in high school.

[Cdub100 3,996]

5 pages are about to be deleted.

[peenie 2,022]

18 minutes ago, Strike said:

Peenie,

  I find it hard to believe that you got out of college without taking an econ class.  I had to take two as part of my GE requirements.  I also took one in high school.

You know what’s funny, I did take a finance class but I dropped it because I couldn’t understand the graphs.  
 

ETA,

 The graphs weren’t like 1 or 2 lines going up and down. There were multiple following different unrelated trends and I realized I was over my head. I should have taken some prerequisite classes. I wasn’t a business major, so I didn’t take any other courses like that. I did take a labor history class. It was great! 

[nobody 2,939]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

Peenie,

  I find it hard to believe that you got out of college without taking an econ class.  I had to take two as part of my GE requirements.  I also took one in high school.

I took an econ class in college.  They didn't go into how the Fed Funds rate effects mortgage.  In fact I never even heard of the Fed Funds rate until maybe the 2008 financial crisis.  I learned about it because I watch a ton of CNBC.  Peenie, if you want to learn about the economy record Squawk on the Street, Power Lunch and Mad Money every day and read a few CNBC articles every day.  After doing that for a few years I knew all kinds of interesting stuff from macro-economics to options trading.

You won't know what the hell they're talking about at first, but just keep watching.  Its like learning new lingo.  You'll eventually pick it up.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,058]

Imagine thinking Gutterboy could save you with an article from the Young Turks. What a couple of boobs. 

[Sean Mooney 2,062]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Imagine thinking Gutterboy could save you with an article from the Young Turks. What a couple of boobs. 

You ever come up with answers to the questions I posed? Still hiding?

Two threads now you've ducked away when questions were asked.

[TimHauck 3,442]

I heard an interesting commercial for a mortgage company yesterday.  They were advertising that their mortgage rates are “lower than what most credit card companies will charge you for interest!”

Sad.

[Raven Fan 362]

The rate hikes are needed to get Trumpflation under control.  Biden letting the Fed do its work combined with his own great stewardship of the economy will lead us to a soft landing.