Site_Rly_Sux is a habitual pyramid dragger who argues in bad faith to derail discussions

submitted by [deleted] from self.SaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]cunninglingus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

1) He's thinking about your post and considering previous reports of the same kinds of concerns. I wouldn't take is personally. In fact, it's good to have this additional information.

2) If there are links you disagree with, note which ones. If you think any of them derail the discussion, note which ones, or ignore them. Comments like his help develop discussion and draw users to your posts.

3) My take on this: I should also look at other reports on the $80trillion (because I don't trust the fear mongering clickbait of express.co.uk. (Part of what site_rly_sux responds to.) Somewhat of a calmer take is here: https://www.investopedia.com/80-trillion-usd-debt-currently-unrecorded-6836151

They mention the 3 main issues:

There is currently up to $80 trillion in off-the-books debt held by non-US institutions in the foreign exchange market.

The debt exceeds the stocks of Treasury bills, repossession papers, and commercial papers combined.

The large debt being unrecorded could be bad for policymakers trying to calm the market and prevent a recession.

4) Though we could discuss FX swaps instead of the links provided by site_rly_sux, I think he's addressed some of the other ways in which risky investments have been reported, and we should see this FX swap in that kind of context because policy makers have not yet created the problems noted in those articles.

5) My other view on this is that this is another reason we need better national regulations on Wall Street. The FX swaps are not entirely undocumented. Much better documentation must be required. The pensioners who depend on that money should never lose their money to criminally bad mangement. The Obama Admin added a number of regulations that a stockbroker friend of mine is still whining about. But these are pensions that are partial FX swaps, which should be illegal if undocumented.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Did you read the entire conversation? I very patiently explained this to him here.

It's posted in conspiracy rather than news, so it's plausible, but its speculative, however the speculation is coming from the BIS which is a pretty mainstream establishment.

My point about the climate stuff was that there were predictions the ice caps would be melted by now, which have not happened. I am sure you have seen the many climate denial arguments on saidit that are along these lines with respect to various predictions and models. I haven't seen you make those arguments with respect to the climate, and you toe the line of the liberal agenda so closely I can't imagine you take those arguments seriously. It surprises me that you think this disqualifies what is being said in the article, especially with it being analogous to climate denial logic. Just because a total collapse from these financial schemes hasnt happened yet does not mean this problem is not something to worry about, just like climate change is still concerning, even if every alarmist prediction hasn't come true as predicted when they said it would or the climate hasn't totally collapsed yet. Surely you are not so dense that you cannot see what I am getting at here wrt to your arguments, and why this is not good grounds to dismiss potentially serious problems. Buying stocks on margin was such a serious problem, and the crash that resulted from this did not happen right away, neither was the 2008 crash a problem that happened overnight. It would have been wrong to say alarmism wasn't warranted because no consequences or crash had happened yet, because eventually it did happen

My point was that this is potentially a catastrophic level problem, and analyzing further whether or not this a disaster in the making is maybe warranted out of abundance of caution - but I posted it in conspiracy rather than news for a reason, yet you accuse me of peddling lies

IF these guys are right, this would be an unmitigated disaster, and there is data that gives us reason to be concerned that this concern is not completely unwarranted. It seems like something that is worth looking into, especially if people have been expressing concern about this in the past ala climate change, regardless of whether the timelines for the predictions were perfect accurate. But if you would rather bury your head in the sand and hope for the best, be my guest

Then he responds with:

No, that's a lie. You just purposefully or accidentally told a lie.

This is fake outrage news generated by the engineers at express.

(I kindly directed to him to the same story by Reuters and WSJ but he wasn't interested.)

You don't care about derivatives or FX swaps I'm guessing (sorry but I don't think I'm wrong)

You just spread it here because you're a panic monger.

This is literally Chipit level discourse he responds with after I wrote a long and reasonable explanation which he completely ignored, as its obvious I am not panic mongering, and he keep applying climate denial logic even after I point out this fallacy to him, and then adds in a few ad hominems for good measure

Can you honestly say this isn't trash tier debating? Literally every interaction he has with people he doesnt agree with is like this, its par for the course for him.

[–]cunninglingus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Correct - I didn't read the entire thread. Yes, he stuck to his main complaint did not think about appropriate responses to the replies to him. Nothing is lower than Chipit or BISH or MightyMorphinfaggot level discourses. Site_rly should have admitted that he had made his main arguments and did not wish to continue the discussion, rather than merely tell you that you were lying &c. This is a good example of him being sloppy. As they say in tennis, you've broken him. 😁

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, by no means is he the only person to ever drag down discussions, I just don't get why he wanted to fight over that article so badly, it wasn;t the first time, and it really annoyed me. I'll admit that I may have intentionally goaded others who dislike him for different reasons into piling onto him.