“No matter how exalted a bank may have been, we all know that if assets were marked to market, the net worth of many of the giants of international banking would disappear. Nevertheless these banks are able to sell their liabilities in financial markets, because the buyers believe that they will be protected against losses by the central bank.”
Blissex - Instead of Defunding the police we should organize around defunding the banks.
IT can happen but voters need to organize and boil it into a POLICY that they demand that their elected leaders support. As long as all we are doing is complaining and there is no ACTION that is being demanded then the politicians are going to do what the banking lobbyists tell them to do.
Sanders leadership on M4A has changed the debate on Universal Health Care and we now have leaders in the Senate and Congress working to get something done. They are battling rich insurance companies so it wont happen over night but action is taking place.
We need a similar leader to fight the banks. Elizabeth Warren could be that leader as the banks hate her anyway.
The biggest thing preventing any of this is that Republicans voters do not vote on economic issues ever. They only vote on identity politics so their leaders give the rich and powerful anything (tax cuts to the rich, deregulation etc...) and everything they want and never pay a price at the polls...
«Republicans voters do not vote on economic issues ever. They only vote on identity politics so their leaders give the rich and powerful anything»
That is ridiculous: the majority of Republican voters and a large minority of Democratic ones vote exclusively on economic issues: bigger real estate prices primarily (a humour author even wrote that real estate prices are the american national religion), and also stock prices, and lower taxes. The republican coalition includes other lobbies too, but please read this article and quotes:
«The growth of the investor class -- those 70 per cent of voters who own stock and are more opposed to taxes and regulations on business as a result -- is strengthening the conservative movement. More gun owners, fewer labor union members, more homeschoolers, more property owners and a dwindling number of FDR-era Democrats all strengthen the conservative movement versus the Democrats.»
«But going into November, what actually saved it for the Republicans was the investor vote, which went heavily R. Why? One, they didn't blame Bush for the collapse of the bubble. They were mad at having lower stock prices and 401(k)s, but they didn't say Bush did this and that caused this. Secondly, the Democratic solution was to sic the trial lawyers on Enron and finish it off. No no no no no. We want our market caps to go back up, not low.
The 1930s rhetoric was bash business -- only a handful of bankers thought that meant them. Now if you say we're going to smash the big corporations, 60-plus percent of voters say "That's my retirement you're messing with. I don't appreciate that". And the Democrats have spent 50 years explaining that Republicans will pollute the earth and kill baby seals to get market caps higher. And in 2002, voters said, “We're sorry about the seals and everything but we really got to get the stock market up.»
«And then, our job as conservatives is to wake up every day and say how do we make more of us and fewer of them. And the left's position is the same. I passed out a series of trends here; I'd be very interested in whether people think I'm missing stuff. I would suggest the biggest trend is the number of people who own shares of stock directly. We've gone from 17 percent of Americans owning stock to up over 50 percent of households. According to Mark Penn, two-thirds of voters in 2002, 2004, somebody who owns at least $5,000 worth of stock is 18 percent more Republican and less Democratic. African-American, no stock, 6 percent Republican; $5,000 worth of stock, 20 percent Republican. Every demographic group gets better with share ownership. Rich, poor, all colors, all genders, with the exception of women who earn more than $75,000 a year, who are already thoroughly Republican and don't get any better. [...] The growth of the investor class – those 70 per cent of voters who own stock and are more opposed to taxes and regulations on business as a result — is strengthening the conservative movement.»
Bliss - your source, the two links you sent, are not from reliable sources and consequently your narrative is flawed in so many ways i can hardly name them all
Lets start with some hard facts on stock ownership in this country.
Today the top 10% of American families own 92% of the entire value of the stock market. That means that 90% of American families share in the value of only 10% of the stock market.
Thus when polled 2/3rds of voters in 2019 said the gains in the stock market had no impact on their financial well being.
So claims by Norquist, like this one, are NOT supported by the evidence:
"The growth of the investor class -- those 70 per cent of voters who own stock and are more opposed to taxes and regulations on business as a result -- is strengthening the conservative movement."
As for the equally preposterous claim that voters vote based on real-estate valuations again the evidence does not support such a claim. According to Pew the top 4 issues for voters this year are The Economy, Health Care, The Supreme Court and the Corona Virus.
The stock market is NOT the economy and given how 2/3rds of voters dont feel the stock market impacts their financial lives Norquists claims are laughable.
Voting records show that in January of 2020 hundreds of thousands of Republicans actually left the Republican Party continuing a 20yr decline in the number of registered Republican voters in this country.
I think that if you are trusting someone like Grover Norquist to inform you about voting in the US you are sadly misinformed. But hey, you are not alone that is for sure.
«The Wall Street and London banks are effectively zombie banks only being kept alive by the repo-market loans and artificial interest rates.»
Nothing new there (except the enormity of the scale) there is this candid quote from political economist Hyman Minsky in 1986:
https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/hm_archive/144/
“No matter how exalted a bank may have been, we all know that if assets were marked to market, the net worth of many of the giants of international banking would disappear. Nevertheless these banks are able to sell their liabilities in financial markets, because the buyers believe that they will be protected against losses by the central bank.”
Blissex - Instead of Defunding the police we should organize around defunding the banks.
IT can happen but voters need to organize and boil it into a POLICY that they demand that their elected leaders support. As long as all we are doing is complaining and there is no ACTION that is being demanded then the politicians are going to do what the banking lobbyists tell them to do.
Sanders leadership on M4A has changed the debate on Universal Health Care and we now have leaders in the Senate and Congress working to get something done. They are battling rich insurance companies so it wont happen over night but action is taking place.
We need a similar leader to fight the banks. Elizabeth Warren could be that leader as the banks hate her anyway.
The biggest thing preventing any of this is that Republicans voters do not vote on economic issues ever. They only vote on identity politics so their leaders give the rich and powerful anything (tax cuts to the rich, deregulation etc...) and everything they want and never pay a price at the polls...
«Republicans voters do not vote on economic issues ever. They only vote on identity politics so their leaders give the rich and powerful anything»
That is ridiculous: the majority of Republican voters and a large minority of Democratic ones vote exclusively on economic issues: bigger real estate prices primarily (a humour author even wrote that real estate prices are the american national religion), and also stock prices, and lower taxes. The republican coalition includes other lobbies too, but please read this article and quotes:
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0903/0903norquistinterview.htm
«The growth of the investor class -- those 70 per cent of voters who own stock and are more opposed to taxes and regulations on business as a result -- is strengthening the conservative movement. More gun owners, fewer labor union members, more homeschoolers, more property owners and a dwindling number of FDR-era Democrats all strengthen the conservative movement versus the Democrats.»
http://web01.prospect.org/article/world-according-grover
«But going into November, what actually saved it for the Republicans was the investor vote, which went heavily R. Why? One, they didn't blame Bush for the collapse of the bubble. They were mad at having lower stock prices and 401(k)s, but they didn't say Bush did this and that caused this. Secondly, the Democratic solution was to sic the trial lawyers on Enron and finish it off. No no no no no. We want our market caps to go back up, not low.
The 1930s rhetoric was bash business -- only a handful of bankers thought that meant them. Now if you say we're going to smash the big corporations, 60-plus percent of voters say "That's my retirement you're messing with. I don't appreciate that". And the Democrats have spent 50 years explaining that Republicans will pollute the earth and kill baby seals to get market caps higher. And in 2002, voters said, “We're sorry about the seals and everything but we really got to get the stock market up.»
«And then, our job as conservatives is to wake up every day and say how do we make more of us and fewer of them. And the left's position is the same. I passed out a series of trends here; I'd be very interested in whether people think I'm missing stuff. I would suggest the biggest trend is the number of people who own shares of stock directly. We've gone from 17 percent of Americans owning stock to up over 50 percent of households. According to Mark Penn, two-thirds of voters in 2002, 2004, somebody who owns at least $5,000 worth of stock is 18 percent more Republican and less Democratic. African-American, no stock, 6 percent Republican; $5,000 worth of stock, 20 percent Republican. Every demographic group gets better with share ownership. Rich, poor, all colors, all genders, with the exception of women who earn more than $75,000 a year, who are already thoroughly Republican and don't get any better. [...] The growth of the investor class – those 70 per cent of voters who own stock and are more opposed to taxes and regulations on business as a result — is strengthening the conservative movement.»
Bliss - your source, the two links you sent, are not from reliable sources and consequently your narrative is flawed in so many ways i can hardly name them all
Lets start with some hard facts on stock ownership in this country.
Today the top 10% of American families own 92% of the entire value of the stock market. That means that 90% of American families share in the value of only 10% of the stock market.
Thus when polled 2/3rds of voters in 2019 said the gains in the stock market had no impact on their financial well being.
https://www.ft.com/content/7fdedb5e-152f-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385
So claims by Norquist, like this one, are NOT supported by the evidence:
"The growth of the investor class -- those 70 per cent of voters who own stock and are more opposed to taxes and regulations on business as a result -- is strengthening the conservative movement."
As for the equally preposterous claim that voters vote based on real-estate valuations again the evidence does not support such a claim. According to Pew the top 4 issues for voters this year are The Economy, Health Care, The Supreme Court and the Corona Virus.
The stock market is NOT the economy and given how 2/3rds of voters dont feel the stock market impacts their financial lives Norquists claims are laughable.
Voting records show that in January of 2020 hundreds of thousands of Republicans actually left the Republican Party continuing a 20yr decline in the number of registered Republican voters in this country.
I think that if you are trusting someone like Grover Norquist to inform you about voting in the US you are sadly misinformed. But hey, you are not alone that is for sure.
https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/registering-by-party-where-the-democrats-and-republicans-are-ahead/