But he acquired it through very questionable means

That’s due to a huge increase in supply

He wasn’t exploitative of consumers

Just of his competitors

Standard Oil was pretty efficient, but that was only because oil had yet to gain traction in the economy and so he had to lower prices to make it a viable fuel

He did get into price wars, in which he lowered prices to drive competitors out of business

But he would raise prices once they were done

There was an overall lowering trend as crude oil itself got cheaper

Not really

All the aforementioned tactics basically dissuaded all but the most local competition

They were more horizontally integrated than vertically integrated, yes

He often did raise prices

He only lowered it when there was serious competition, a new market to expand into, or an internal cost savings

Those are crude oil prices

Not refined product

My point was that falling crude oil prices were the main drive behind Rockefeller’s drops in refined oil prices

Not really the marginal competition

Unfortunately, I am unable to find historical data for refined oil prices

and petroleum products p

yep

The subprime mortgage crisis seems like the obvious answer

I assume you’re going to say it’s the fault of the government, which forced banks to lend mortgages to low-income homeowners who eventually were unable to pay it back, causing a widespread financial crisis?

Banks were accumulating extra risk, which was indeed partially caused by the government’s homeownership campaign, but the main fault lies with the banks repackaging them into mortgage-backed securities and presenting them to investors as far lower risk investments than they actually were, thereby leading to misinformed and misplaced investment that eventually led to a market crash.

However, of course, some of that stuff was just bad luck, and was nobody’s fault.

I haven’t done enough specific research into the regulations present to really have an answer

Just looking at the Wikipedia article

“The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission formed by the US Congress in 2009 to investigate the causes of the 2008 financial crisis, concluded ‘the CRA was not a significant factor in subprime lending or the crisis’.”

“According to Yellen, former Chair of the Federal Reserve, independent mortgage companies made risky "higher-priced" loans at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts; most CRA loans were responsibly made, and were not the "higher-priced" loans that have contributed to the current crisis.”

What about them?

“In 2015, Federal Reserve Board economists Neil Bhutta and Daniel Ringo released a summary of available studies on both sides of the debate. They found that any impact of the CRA on risk was mitigated by the extraordinarily small market share that CRA eligible loans held in comparison with non-CRA eligible mortgage lending”

I gtg

Sorry

Hi

Heyo

🤔

You can say what you want about Democratic policies, but what you’re saying about Democrats as a whole is just not true

Republicans and democrats are both just people. Neither group is evil.

Both parties have vocal minorities that act as embarrassments for the larger group

I strongly doubt that

Most democrats I know have good intentions

It’s just whether they work or not

They’re politicians; they’re about as evil as Republican politicians

How so

“The amount of people they’ve had?”

Would you say the old Clinton neolib-type or the new AOC hard liberals are more evil?

Hillary vs AOC

Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez

I think I spelled that correctly

Also thank you for taking my survey

Hm

Pelosi vs Hillary

You seem to have a misplaced view of Muslims

There are some bad Muslims, sure, but that doesnt make all followers of the religion completely useless to society. The Muslim caliphates of the Middle Ages we’re engaged in scientific advancement far more than the warring European Christian powers. The difference is that back then, the Christians were the fundamentalists. Now, after decades of radicalization and war, it’s Middle Eastern Muslims.

I know Muslims who are great people, but I also know that there are horrible Muslims. The problem isn’t with them as a group, it’s the ideas they had.

I agree, however, that a lot of idea perpetuated by Islam are downright wrong and shouldn’t have a place in modern society. However, there is and always has been the ability to moderate and reform religion. Many (if not most) modern Christians don’t follow the Bible perfectly literally, for example.

White guilt isn’t so much a problem as the lasting economic and social effects of discrimination in past eras. However, feeling guilt based on your race alone makes no sense; helping victims is far more important than trying to atone for the sins of some ancestor you never knew.

**^**

🤔

Yep

This server goes from libtards like us to full on nazis to libertarians to conservatives

And everything possible in between

It’s pretty much wrong to think otherwise

Also how do I get libgay role

Libgay left

“Social libertarian” according to 8values

Generally just medium left

Closer to center

More liberal than leftist

Ack

Abortion is one of the topics where there’s no real “right” answer, I think

I mean

I’m using leftist to refer to economic leftist, liberal to refer to social liberal

That isn’t really the right way, but it’s convenient

Honestly, IMO it depends more on human morals than on any truly verifiable phenomenon. I wouldn’t be opposed to leaving it up to people to decide locally

My opinion is that late-term abortion is in almost all cases not right, but I’m not sure about my ability to force that on other people

Yep

@Trump Republic Representative I just noticed your name

ha

I remember I was in a server that had gotten overrun by full-on exterminate-the-Jews neo-Nazis

Ah yes

I used to not have the opinions I do now

Eyy I have libgay role

Hmm

you know

you could join me and my friend’s server but I’m not sure if they need more liberals

`There are approximately 2.3 genders`

I would say leftism is economic while liberalism is social

Except, you know, vote in elections and in Congress

Transgender people are not “mentally unstable”

In my experience not even most SJWs/libs think that, but they think other, slightly less downright stupid but similar things

I would say it’s more bullying and not being accepted than mental instability

It’s hard not to be depressed when everyone calls you mentally unstable and diseased

First off, no one wants to put black men on top. That doesn’t make any sense.

Second, you do have to admit that getting things from your parents like good school districts, a well-funded upbringing, a good college/education, and lack of discrimination has to help you regardless of how good or bad, skilled or unskilled of a person you are on your own.

So it would be good if *everybody* got to share in the same beneficial initial conditions. Not only would that allow people to succeed on their own merits rather than the wealth of their parents, but it’s profitable to society in the long run as you get a generation of well-educated, upwardly mobile citizens.

That’s not the goal; the goal is to close the gap, not increase gaps by any means.

Obviously affirmative action that benefits a more powerful group would make no sense.

I thought it was the effects that mattered more than intent