4 ms·

> Why would any rational investor purchase dog crap knowingly for the good of society, by spending that society's money on dog crap. Instead, buy the dog, disco

> Why would any rational investor purchase dog crap knowingly for the good of society, by spending that society's money on dog crap. Instead, buy the dog, discounted by the amount of dog crap it has, and squeezed by how desperate the seller is of what is left. I don't think you understand how TARP worked if you think that's even remotely applicable as an analogy > This is how capitalism is supposed to work. Maybe you should learn a little more about the system you claim to be critiquing, so your criticisms don't fall so completely flat.

hndamien 8y ago
Since you are so wise, maybe you could enlighten me rather than responding with a response that amounts to - you know nothing, please learn more. This is supposed to be a forum for intelligent discussion. I literally quoted investopedia for how TARP works - so don't pretend that isn't how it worked. "Purchasing illiquid Mortgage Backed Securities" aka "Toxic Assets" aka "Dog Crap".
- chimeracoder 8y ago
  > This is supposed to be a forum for intelligent discussion And yet you began with a sarcastic quip, followed by comparing TARP - a program that has generally been considered a successful part of mitigating the 2008 financial crisis by all mainstream economists, to different degrees - to passing around a bag of "dog crap". That's not what a good-faith intellectual discussion looks like, so don't expect replies to exceed the level of effort and discourse that you yourself are presenting.
  - hndamien 8y ago
    That isn't sarcasm, it is metaphor. You are looking for a pretty cheap out if you think using metaphor reduces discussion such that you can just respond by calling somebody dumb. I'm going to stop here because you have set this discussion on a path towards unhelpful negativity. I hope any moderator/ reader reading this can see that you side railed this and not me. None of my discussion was about you, but was about the issue. Your response might as well breach the name calling rules of this forum.
  - hndamien 8y ago
    I just realised you were referring to the sarcasm after your rudeness, to justify your rudeness. Makes sense /s

hndamien 8y ago

Since you are so wise, maybe you could enlighten me rather than responding with a response that amounts to - you know nothing, please learn more. This is supposed to be a forum for intelligent discussion. I literally quoted investopedia for how TARP works - so don't pretend that isn't how it worked. "Purchasing illiquid Mortgage Backed Securities" aka "Toxic Assets" aka "Dog Crap".

chimeracoder 8y ago
> This is supposed to be a forum for intelligent discussion And yet you began with a sarcastic quip, followed by comparing TARP - a program that has generally been considered a successful part of mitigating the 2008 financial crisis by all mainstream economists, to different degrees - to passing around a bag of "dog crap". That's not what a good-faith intellectual discussion looks like, so don't expect replies to exceed the level of effort and discourse that you yourself are presenting.
- hndamien 8y ago
  That isn't sarcasm, it is metaphor. You are looking for a pretty cheap out if you think using metaphor reduces discussion such that you can just respond by calling somebody dumb. I'm going to stop here because you have set this discussion on a path towards unhelpful negativity. I hope any moderator/ reader reading this can see that you side railed this and not me. None of my discussion was about you, but was about the issue. Your response might as well breach the name calling rules of this forum.
- hndamien 8y ago
  I just realised you were referring to the sarcasm after your rudeness, to justify your rudeness. Makes sense /s