Opinion First Thing: Trump says he is firing Fed governor Lisa Cook in escalating attack on bank’s independence

[Shidlord]

Great, you asked for a source, I gave it to you, and instead of providing anything that says otherwise, you scramble for excuses and attempts to move goalposts.

I don't care about their "socioeconomic" excuses. They aren't hiring or admitting white people of "similar socioeconomic status" for their skin color, so it's not relevant to anything.

your source is nearly 20 years old, this is not relevant to the discussion at hand. This is the source you relied on therefore is quite reasonable to highlight said flaws in the source.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

Lol, why didn't you paste the whole first paragraph instead of just the sentence giving her name? Oh, I know why, because this is the very next sentence of the 1st paragraph before any distinguishing claims or accomplishments, and also the first thing mentioned after her job title in most of the articles about her.

She is the first Black woman to sit on the Board.


Since she's so "incredibly qualified" according to you, she should have no problem finding another job after getting shitcanned for mortgage fraud.

So not the first thing then you dolt ,glad we agree I guess if you said it was in the first paragraph it wouldn't have fit your narrative though would it .

Lol well she isn't incredibly qualified according to me she quantifiably is .

And yes she will have no trouble finding another job but no one being honest thinks she was fired for mortgage fraud

 

[nostradumbass]

your source is nearly 20 years old, this is not relevant to the discussion at hand. This is the source you relied on therefore is quite reasonable to highlight said flaws in the source.

When do you think these appointments went to college? Oh that's right, about 20-30 years ago. How the hell are stats from when all of them were in school "not relevant to the discussion at hand"?

Good God, it would be even more egregious if Biden was appointmenting federal judges who just got out of law school.

Again, if you had any source claiming any of it has changed, you would have posted it, and it still wouldn't be relevant to 50-60 year old judicial appointees.

 

[nostradumbass]

So not the first thing then you dolt ,glad we agree I guess if you said it was in the first paragraph it wouldn't have fit your narrative though would it .

Lol well she isn't incredibly qualified according to me she quantifiably is .

And yes she will have no trouble finding another job but no one being honest thinks she was fired for mortgage fraud

Lemme guess, she was fired because of racism? Because race is only relevant to getting fired for mortgage fraud, and totally irrelevant to getting the job after the guy who appointed you said beforehand he wanted people of your race and sex.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

There's no attacks on African Americans. That's only coming from people who think they are stupid and voted against their interests. That the African American vote is somehow owed to Democrats. C'mon, just think rationally. Why do you think millions of minorities flooded to Trump's side last election? Do you think they are all just stupid and don't know better?

Whatever each person's reason was is likely different. Trump made a lot of promises on the campaign trail, and his opponent was not very popular, but that doesn’t mean there aren't any regrets or that they support all of Trump's policies. I made no other inference about minorities or that Democrats somehow deserve all minorities' votes. There are plenty of rich minorities that support Trump because with him in power the rich will get richer while the middle and lower classes foot the bill. As far as the poorly educated are concerned that's something that transcends race.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

Lemme guess, she was fired because of racism? Because race is only relevant to getting fired for mortgage fraud, and totally irrelevant to getting the job after the guy who appointed you said beforehand he wanted people of your race and sex.

So you really are as dumb as a fucking rock

He wants a sycophant in there , maybe you should apply

If the Supreme Court lets Trump replace Cook with a loyalist, he might soon achieve a full-blown takeover of the Federal Reserve

The Lisa Cook Case Could Be the Whole Ball Game

If the Supreme Court lets Trump replace Cook with a loyalist, he might soon achieve a full-blown takeover of the Federal Reserve.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Shidlord]

When do you think these appointments went to college? Oh that's right, about 20-30 years ago. How the hell are stats from when all of them were in school "not relevant to the discussion at hand"?

Good God, it would be even more egregious if Biden was appointmenting federal judges who just got out of law school.

Again, if you had any source claiming any of it has changed, you would have posted it, and it still wouldn't be relevant to 50-60 year old judicial appointees.

maybe becasue you stated "black women are 2% of practicing lawyers and the majority are in the bottom 10% of their class" which implies this is the case now, not "that according to a source in 2006 ...." which even then the paper you quoted did not prove based on the flaws that i have identifed. In relation to providing sources suggesting it has changed, that is not my intent, the burden of proof lies in the person making the allegation not for me to present counter evidence.

 

[panamaican]

questions and flaws)

1) the date of this report was 2006, nearly 20 years ago. How is this relevant? The legal, educational, and social landscape has shifted dramatically since the report’s release.
2) it does not isolate black women
3) The report cites bar failure and dropout rates but doesn’t contextualize them with socioeconomic data, undergraduate preparation, or support structures.
4) It omits comparative data on white students with similar credentials, which could reveal whether outcomes are due to mismatch or broader systemic issues.
4) Much of the analysis is based on testimony and selective studies rather than comprehensive, peer-reviewed data.

@nostradumbass

The study is 2 decades old and was primarily about mismatch. Some people misinterpreted that and the conclusions that it was about. It's really important that people understand law school to understand this study.

The first thing to understand is that law school grades on a ranked curve. Your grades reflect your ranking in the class, not necessarily your grasp of the material. In a class of 20 kids, the professor will give the top 2 students an A, the next 5 students a B, the next 10 students a C, and the bottom 3 students a D. The grade distribution is established before the tests are taken. So, the A students and the D students could have 95% identical tests but there will be 2 As and 3 Ds, no matter what. It's meant to prepare lawyers for the reality that it doesn't matter how good your case is, the job is competitive. Someone wins, someone loses and the margins can be extremely small.

The second thing is about academic mismatch and that matters in light of the first thing. Law schools generally admit based on LSAT scores. And law students are generally told to go to the best law school that you get admitted to. However, knowing that some students come from disadvantaged backgrounds, they might be admitted to law schools where their LSAT scores put them in the bottom quartile of their class. Still within the admissions criteria but closer to the bottom.

This creates the "mismatch". If the best school the student gets into is also a school where their LSAT score is near the bottom, the ranking curve in the grading system almost guarantees that they'll be at the bottom of their law school class. This is independent of whether or not they've mastered the material. The gap between the top students and the C students is real but it's also manufactured.

This isn't as much of an issue in undergrad where students are often tested purely on if they know the material and can apply it.

Anyway, for the people who care about this stuff, there was a conversation back then about if the law school admission process was actually harming the production of black lawyers by creating this mismatch. And many black law students who would have been A students at one law school ended up as C students because they picked the best law school they could get into rather than the law school where their LSAT scores put them in top 10% of admitted students.

So understanding mismatch in law school is extremely important.

However, this has nothing to do with performance in the real world. And that's other part. The best lawyers are often not the best law students because much of the practice of law is not what is taught in law school. Law school is theoretical, it's memorization, it's very broad. Real law is practical, full of compromises and often very narrow. So plenty of phenomenal lawyers, white, black, etc., were not the best law students because real law and law school diverge immediately upon graduation.

None of that has any bearing on Lisa Cook. Her accomplishments are pretty straightforward. She's got ascertainable positions and she's written research papers that people can read and thus judge her scholarship.

Moreover, the alleged mortgage fraud, is sadly common in many, many high income households. It's still fraud and, if she's guilty, she should lose her job but I know far too many people who are doing the same thing to get better loan terms, lol. It's essentially the same thing Trump was accused of -- lying on banking documents to get better loan rates -- except this was residential instead of commercial.

 

[Limbo Pete]

@nostradumbass

The study is 2 decades old and was primarily about mismatch. Some people misinterpreted that and the conclusions that it was about. It's really important that people understand law school to understand this study.

The first thing to understand is that law school grades on a ranked curve. Your grades reflect your ranking in the class, not necessarily your grasp of the material. In a class of 20 kids, the professor will give the top 2 students an A, the next 5 students a B, the next 10 students a C, and the bottom 3 students a D. The grade distribution is established before the tests are taken. So, the A students and the D students could have 95% identical tests but there will be 2 As and 3 Ds, no matter what. It's meant to prepare lawyers for the reality that it doesn't matter how good your case is, the job is competitive. Someone wins, someone loses and the margins can be extremely small.

The second thing is about academic mismatch and that matters in light of the first thing. Law schools generally admit based on LSAT scores. And law students are generally told to go to the best law school that you get admitted to. However, knowing that some students come from disadvantaged backgrounds, they might be admitted to law schools where their LSAT scores put them in the bottom quartile of their class. Still within the admissions criteria but closer to the bottom.

This creates the "mismatch". If the best school the student gets into is also a school where their LSAT score is near the bottom, the ranking curve in the grading system almost guarantees that they'll be at the bottom of their law school class. This is independent of whether or not they've mastered the material. The gap between the top students and the C students is real but it's also manufactured.

This isn't as much of an issue in undergrad where students are often tested purely on if they know the material and can apply it.

Anyway, for the people who care about this stuff, there was a conversation back then about if the law school admission process was actually harming the production of black lawyers by creating this mismatch. And many black law students who would have been A students at one law school ended up as C students because they picked the best law school they could get into rather than the law school where their LSAT scores put them in top 10% of admitted students.

So understanding mismatch in law school is extremely important.

However, this has nothing to do with performance in the real world. And that's other part. The best lawyers are often not the best law students because much of the practice of law is not what is taught in law school. Law school is theoretical, it's memorization, it's very broad. Real law is practical, full of compromises and often very narrow. So plenty of phenomenal lawyers, white, black, etc., were not the best law students because real law and law school diverge immediately upon graduation.

None of that has any bearing on Lisa Cook. Her accomplishments are pretty straightforward. She's got ascertainable positions and she's written research papers that people can read and thus judge her scholarship.

Moreover, the alleged mortgage fraud, is sadly common in many, many high income households. It's still fraud and, if she's guilty, she should lose her job but I know far too many people who are doing the same thing to get better loan terms, lol. It's essentially the same thing Trump was accused of -- lying on banking documents to get better loan rates -- except this was residential instead of commercial.

This post would be a walk off ko.... if nostradumbass was an actual person and not a quasi sentient trashcan

 

[nostradumbass]

maybe becasue you stated "black women are 2% of practicing lawyers and the majority are in the bottom 10% of their class" which implies this is the case now, not "that according to a source in 2006 ...." which even then the paper you quoted did not prove based on the flaws that i have identifed. In realtions to sources suggested is has changed that is not my intent, the burden of proof lies in the person making the allegation not for me to pesent counter evidence.

YOU are the one trying to simultaneously challenging the source and scrambling for excuses for why it's true, so the burden of proof for your challenge is on you, it's obviously not up to me to find sources that don't exist for your feelings.

You didn't identify any flaw, you seemed to acknowledge it's true by scrambling for excuses.

Nobody cares how poor white performed because nobody makes excuses for and hires poor whites anyway if they underperform.

 

[cincymma79]

So you really are as dumb as a fucking rock

He wants a sycophant in there , maybe you should apply

If the Supreme Court lets Trump replace Cook with a loyalist, he might soon achieve a full-blown takeover of the Federal Reserve

The Lisa Cook Case Could Be the Whole Ball Game

If the Supreme Court lets Trump replace Cook with a loyalist, he might soon achieve a full-blown takeover of the Federal Reserve.

www.theatlantic.com

If he puts someone in who makes mortgages cheaper it’ll be Hitler tikes 911

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

If he puts someone in who makes mortgages cheaper it’ll be Hitler tikes 911

You're brain has turned to mush , I hope whatever is going on with you , you get it figured out.

 

[Shidlord]

YOU are the one trying to simultaneously challenging the source and scrambling for excuses for why it's true, so the burden of proof for your challenge is on you, it's obviously not up to me to find sources that don't exist for your feelings.

You didn't identify any flaw, you seemed to acknowledge it's true by scrambling for excuses.

Nobody cares how poor white performed because nobody makes excuses for and hires poor whites anyway if they underperform.

that is not how debating works, if you make a claim, it is down to you to prove it is true. You stated that "black women are 2% of practicing lawyers and the majority are in the bottom 10% of their class". This has not proven to be true in your source for reasons i have already outlined as flaws. It is not down to me to disprove a claim that you have made, it is down to you to prove it.

 

[nostradumbass]

that is not how debating works, if you make a claim, it is down to you to prove it is true. You stated that "black women are 2% of practicing lawyers and the majority are in the bottom 10% of their class". This has not proven to be true in your source for reasons i have already outlined as flaws. It is not down to me to disprove a claim that you have made, it is down to you to prove it.

Yeah, debating obviously works by you asking for a source, getting it, then crying about white people and your feeling with absolutely nothing to contradict any of it.

You never did answer why numbers from 20 years ago are "irrelevant" to a discussion about people who were in school 20 years ago, and you didn't provide anything at all suggesting they've changed since then, because you were wrong and are just trying to find an exit without admitting it. You could have saved yourself the embarrassment by just admitting "oh, I didn't know that" instead of scrambling and trying to deflect with "but but but white people".

 

[nostradumbass]

This post would be a walk off ko.... if nostradumbass was an actual person and not a quasi sentient trashcan

You should stick to embarrassing fan fiction posts about how you'd tough talk immigration agents to get them to back down and the whole crowd would cheer, you tubby middle aged dork.

 

[Shidlord]

Yeah, debating obviously works by you asking for a source, getting it, then crying about white people and your feeling with absolutely nothing to contradict any of it.

You never did answer why numbers from 20 years ago are "irrelevant" to a discussion about people who were in school 20 years ago, and you didn't provide anything at all suggesting they've changed since then, because you were wrong and are just trying to find an exit without admitting it. You could have saved yourself the embarrassment by just admitting "oh, I didn't know that" instead of scrambling and trying to deflect with "but but but white people".

again, you moron it is not down to me to disprove a claim you made, it is down to you to prove your claim. You have not done this. The numbers from 20 years ago are irrelevant because guess what YOU HAVE NOT PROVEN YOUR CLAIM!!!!! do you get it now?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

He stated how lowering interest rates historically caused inflation and then suggested half the population is too stupid to understand. Lowering interest rates leads to lower prices, thus people spending more money. Supply and demand causes the price increase. This is how an economy functions. Thats why rates don't stay fixed.

They don't stay fixed especially at 0% right?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

No I'm not asking what you think, I'm pointing out that when Trump lost instead of accepting that loss he and the majority of the GOP rejected the results of the election and tried to overturn it. In light of that I hope you can forgive me if its hard to take the insistence on accountability from the MAGA side of the aisle seriously.

And if he has his way there will be ICE agents and soldiers loyal to him patrolling Blue cities come the next election. What could go wrong?

 

[Rod1]

If he puts someone in who makes mortgages cheaper it’ll be Hitler tikes 911

Classic retard populist voter kind of thinking

"why don't we print more money and make everyone rich that way"

Trump wants to go full Erdogarn and make the money printer go BRRR that's why he is pissed at Powell.

 

[Rod1]

Lowering interest rates leads to lower prices,

What? lower interest rates lead to higher consumption because people borrow more when loans are cheaper

thus people spending more money.

No, people spend more money because borrowing costs are lower, not because prices are lower on the contrary prices tend to go up.

Supply and demand causes the price increase. This is how an economy functions. Thats why rates don't stay fixed.

Yup, and demand goes up when borrowing prices are down.