This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history (/Thread-This-may-be-the-biggest-accounting-fraud-in-history) |
RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - bfine32 - 09-13-2019 (09-12-2019, 06:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except that the information they were basing the assertion that it would earn money was based on a statement from a nonpartisan governmental agency over which neither Congress nor the White House had any authority. Were it fraud of any sort it would need to be proven that there was undue influence on the CBO in producing those figures from someone. As this time, there is no evidence of anyone doing such a thing. It is exactly why I keep saying we would have to show intent. Stating a reason other than your actual reason for having America assume the financial risk (as you asserted as a possibility) would be more easily associate with fraud than simply over-estimating your profits. I appreciate your expertise in the field but business finance is not something I'm ignorant of. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - bfine32 - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 12:29 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Oh, here we go again. The problem with this argument is you have repeatedly agreed with the WSJ since you started this thread and you further went on to suggest other reasons why it was accounting fraud that have nothing to due with actual accounting fraud. But, the most important underlying reasons to the WSJ's accusation of fraud (and your agreement with their accusation) are the CBO's projections showing billions in profit. If that is the case, and it is, then Trump would have to be involved in fraud because the CBO's projections during the Trump administration showed billions in profit, also. But, neither the WSJ or you will acknowledge this because then the entire argument is moot because the WSJ editorial board isn't going to accuse the Trump administration of accounting fraud based upon those CBO projections showing billions in profits during his tenure . . . like they did with the Obama administration. They certainly wouldn't have made false accusations those billions were going to fund Obamacare during Trump's tenure like they did with Obama. It's like peeling an onion of bullshit. Just bullshit layered upon bullshit revealing more bullshit underneath.I stopped right there as I felt no longer compelled to read the rest of made up accusations. From the very beginning I have said we would have to establish intent. Never had I said "The WSJ is right!! This is the biggest account fraud in history" no matter how badly you want me to have said it so you can save face from your ridiculous 2012 assertion. Now if you'll excuse me Matt and I might be discussing the actual situation. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 12:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is exactly why I keep saying we would have to show intent. Stating a reason other than your actual reason for having America assume the financial risk (as you asserted as a possibility) would be more easily associate with fraud than simply over-estimating your profits. I appreciate your expertise in the field but business finance is not something I'm ignorant of. Except the loans were already guaranteed by the federal government. Meaning what? Meaning "America" already assumed the financial risk, not the private lender. Because the lender was guaranteed to recoup their money from the federal government if the borrower failed to pay. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - bfine32 - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 12:52 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Except the loans were already guaranteed by the federal government. Meaning what? Meaning "America" already assumed the financial risk, not the private lender. Because the lender was guaranteed to recoup their money from the federal government if the borrower failed to pay. Meaning the private lender was out 3% of the principle owed. Why do you think private lenders were getting out prior to 2010. Because you cannot make money recouping only 97% of your principle. You lose money. Private lenders were figuring this out. Now here's where 2012 comes in. The government made it easier to qualify for loans that were already being shown to cost money. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 12:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I stopped right there as I felt no longer compelled to read the rest of made up accusations. From the very beginning I have said we would have to establish intent. Never had I said "The WSJ is right!! This is the biggest account fraud in history" no matter how badly you want me to have said it so you can save face from your ridiculous 2012 assertion. Too bad you stopped right there because you missed some really informative shit. It wasn't my ridiculous 2012 assertion, it was the WSJ's ridiculous 2012 assertion these "nifty" plans were created in 2012. I even provided the actual quote and a link to the actual WSJ editorial rather than an article about the article. Scroll back if you need to jog your memory. Unlike the WSJ, I did the work of specifying the programs which were passed in 2010 and 2012. Furthermore, I specified the sections of the act that prohibited the profits from being earmarked for Obamacare and any profits would be applied to deficit reduction which directly contradict the WSJ's lies. It's also undeniably true the House of Representatives was controlled by the Republicans during the 112th Congress who approved modifications to these "nifty" programs WHICH STILL DON'T PAY FOR OBAMACARE. From the beginning you have agreed with the WSJ's rationale; the CBO reports and paying for Obamacare. The former applies to both the Obama and Trump administrations. The latter is demonstrably false. You have also suggested other reasons to support the accusation of accounting fraud. You took it a step further suggesting "collusion." LOL Nice use of a popular buzzword, by the way. You can't honestly suggest there was accounting fraud multiple times then claim you never said that and expect the denial to be taken seriously. How 'bout we segue into: explain nationalizing the market? RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 01:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Meaning the private lender was out 3% of the principle owed. Why do you think private lenders were getting out prior to 2010. Because you cannot make money recouping only 97% of your principle. You lose money. Private lenders were figuring this out. Now here's where 2012 comes in. The government made it easier to qualify for loans that were already being shown to cost money. Let's use your Maxine Water's source . . . https://freebeacon.com/politics/waters-unaware-the-federal-government-nationalized-student-loans-in-2010/ Quote:Waters then changed the subject small business, asking CEOs why they have not lent more to small businesses since the financial crisis. There was this thing called a financial crisis of 2007-2008 which directly led to this other thing called the Great Recession caused by these private lenders knowingly making bad loans and knowingly selling derivatives based upon these bad loans which led to them being bailed out by the government. What happens to credit during a recession? It dries up. At that time, they were lending less money across the board because they screwed up not just the lending business, but the whole global economy. In 2008, Bank of America and Citigroup each received a $20 billion government bailout while JP Morgan Chase received a $12 billion government bailout. Kinda hard for those private lenders who were flat broke and on the verge of collapse to loan students money and tell them to be responsible for their debts while simultaneously receiving a Welfare check from the government because they themselves weren't responsible for their debts. If you're wondering why I chose those three check your Maxine Waters link. Now, I need to see where you're getting that 97% figure. Just like I needed to see where the WSJ's info came from about student loans paying for Obamacare which ultimately proved to be completely false. There has been enough misleading or out right false information coming out of this WSJ article that I need to see evidence to believe otherwise. And . . . explain nationalizing the market? RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - bfine32 - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 04:52 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Let's use your Maxine Water's source . . .I have grown tired. But as a farewell gift: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-is-federally-guaranteed-student-loan.html Hopefully answers your 97% question: Quote:The Guaranteed Student Loan Program (FFELs) Quote:Under the guaranteed student loan program, private lenders—including Sallie Mae and commercial banks—issued student loans that were guaranteed by the federal government. Guaranteed loans are also called Federal Family Education Loans (FFELs). Here's how the "guarantee" works: Hopefully answers you quest to have Nationalization explained: Quote:The Direct Student Loan Program Quote:Prior to June 30, 2010, lenders issued federal student loans either as guaranteed student loans or as “direct” student loans. Direct loans are issued directly by the federal government. Whether you received guaranteed or direct loans depended on which loan program your school signed up for. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 09-13-2019 (09-13-2019, 05:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have grown tired. I can imagine. Carrying all that water for the WSJ. Quote:But as a farewell gift: Farewell? You getting ready to leave work and head home for the weekend? Quote:https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-is-federally-guaranteed-student-loan.html Thank you. See? That wasn't so hard. But, private lenders would only be getting back a 97% return if every student paid back $0.00 on every loan. That's why banks charge interest on loans; to cover their losses they know will occur despite their best efforts to prevent them. And 97% is a helluva lot better than an unsecured loan. So at worst they would receive a minimum 97% return on a government guaranteed loan instead of 0% on a non-guaranteed loan. Boo hoo hoo, cry me a river. By the way, that's 97% you don't think tax payers should pay. Remember? That's why you're against "nationalizing the market," because the tax payer has to pay on bad loans. So if you're against federal student loans because the tax payer might foot the bill then simple logic would dictate you would also have to be against federally guaranteed private lender student loans. Or you would be 97% against each individual federally guaranteed private lender loan. I'll let you figure it out because you seemed to be a little confused on what you're against. With this frightening revelation I'd imagine you're pretty close to declaring, "I'm done with this." Right? Quote:Hopefully answers you quest to have Nationalization explained: Thank you. That wasn't that hard, either. So you're telling me borrowers can only get federal student loans from the federal government? But, private lenders are still able and, in fact, do make student loans, just not federally insured student loans. Huh. So that would be like the federal government "nationalizing" our federal government in which our state and local governments would still be able to perform their functions at the state and local level. HOLY SHIT!!! This means almost every federal program has been nationalized on a national level! Send up the INFO WARS BAT SHIT CRAZY SIGNAL to alert Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and the team at the WSJ so we can warn all of America of this nefarious plot because we will not stand for our military to be nationalized like the federal government did with federal student loans and LET'S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!! RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - GMDino - 10-11-2019 Maybe we'll finally see if THIS is the greatest accounting fraud in all of history? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-11/us-appeals-court-upholds-decision-in-trump-accountant-tax-case Quote:President Donald Trump, under siege from House Democrats weighing impeachment, suffered a stinging blow as a federal appeals court upheld a subpoena ordering his accountants to provide Congress with his financial records. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - michaelsean - 10-14-2019 (10-11-2019, 11:36 AM)GMDino Wrote: Maybe we'll finally see if THIS is the greatest accounting fraud in all of history? Just to let you know beforehand, it won't be. He doesn't have enough money to qualify. Think early 2000s for starters. RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - GMDino - 11-07-2019 More Trump fraud.
RE: This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history - jj22 - 11-08-2019 This thread didn't turn out well. It's really hard for people to criticize Obama now given what all they defend Trump on. That's one of the downfalls of what we are seeing in todays Presidency. There's hardly anything Trump defenders/supporters will be able to say about any future President. I mean they will still try (obviously), but that's why their credibility is in such bad shape. It's also why they should have never let someone like Trump establish their level of common sense and love for this great Nation. For Trump they love Putin, love Kim, applaud Presidents who call on other Nations to attack Americans and our Democracy, put our enemy's on a pedestal while attacking our allies, all ending in reflection of their character and patriotism. |