No legislation, regulation, oversight committee, will ever take the place of good, old-fashioned honesty and ethics. Barney Franks, Chris Dodd, Franklin Raynes, have much to answer for regarding the current crisis. It is easy to blame Bush for everything that has happened. Ironic how he was able to achieve all this in the environment of security that he provided by making sure that the U.S. has not been attacked since 9/11. Want to bet on how ugly the world would be if the U.S. had been both attacked and had to deal with this mess? Well, now, we have a new "leader" -- w're taking the first steps to Hope and Change -- let's give him a chance. The verdict should be known before the next 4 years.
BUSINESS
End of the ‘Ownership Society’
Published Oct 11, 2008
From the magazine issue dated Oct 20, 2008
-
Posted By: Terroristkiller @ 02/23/2009 11:44:24 AM
-
Posted By: YashBudini @ 12/10/2008 5:05:27 PM
Sign on Bush's Desk:
Th buck stops here
<--------------------->
-
Posted By: rube @ 11/21/2008 7:52:18 PM
Ownership society- yeah what Bush didnt realize is that only a few Americans would be owning
the smoldering ashes of a once equitable and great nation!
-
Posted By: LieXPoser @ 11/07/2008 4:33:10 AM
NowForTheTruth apparently doesn't know the definition of the word "truth". Can't have facts getting in the way of republican lies.
HR-1461, the 2005 legislation that NFTT is speaking of was indeed sponsored by republicans and marketed as a "regulation" bill. HR-1461 passed in the House with a majority from both parties - almost unanimous by Republicans, almost 2 to 1 by Democrats (apparently half the Dems weren't buying the mockery of a "regulation" bill) - but it was killed in committee in the Senate where Dodd was the chair but a Republican was the ranking member.
Given that the Republicans held a majority in both chambers and had a Republican president they could have passed that bill, or any other, if they wanted to. But that's neither here nor there.
Here's a few things the conservative think tank AEI had to say about the bill:
"While the bill makes some modest improvements to the weak regulatory structure of OFHEO today, these improvements do not bring the authority of the new regulator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the level currently exercised by federal bank regulators. Moreover, the deficiencies of the bill so far outweigh its modest regulatory improvements that the taxpayers and the economy generally would be better off with current law. "
"the bill limits OFHEO???s [the regulator's] activities immediately after enactment to winding up its operations, but does not authorize the new regulator to begin operations for a year. In the meantime, the GSEs (including the Federal Home Loan Banks) are free from safety-and-soundness oversight, and their expansion into new lines of business would not be controlled. Then, when the new regulator begins operations, it is prohibited from reviewing the activities in which Fannie and Freddie are already engaged. The result is a hiatus in which Fannie and Freddie have a free pass to enter any field that might arguably be related to their mission, with little authority in the new regulator to question its legitimacy under the law. This provision alone should be of concern to the many housing-related industries that might find themselves competing with Fannie and Freddie one year after the enactment of a law that contains the elements of this bill."
And there's lot's more, go read it, (http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.22705/pub_detail.asp):
If you want to know the truth don't read the biased articles provided by NowForTheTruth, and don't believe AEI (they are, after all, packed with devious money worshiping republicans), go read the bill for yourself: (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.01461:)
-
Posted By: LieXPoser @ 11/07/2008 4:15:19 AM
Now
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/16/2008 9:21:17 AM
Braes, link from below: http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/05/real_estate/foreclosures_rise_again/index.htm
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/24/2008 4:41:28 PM
From the Administrations spokespunk concerning oil prices and market effects:
"It has always been our view that the value of commodities, including oil, should be determined in open, competitive markets, and not by these kinds of anti-market production decisions," White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said Friday. "The high oil prices from the past year contributed to the slowdown in demand and the subsequent downturn in the economy, and we would ask that everyone keep that in mind going forward."
It's about the oil. Cartels, Rigged markets, and a weakened consumer. -
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 5:02:40 PM
Billtill says: I have also already conceded that there are numerous factors that caused this mess. Anyone who argues the subprime collapse was not the single biggest reason for it is not based in reality. Thats all there is to it. Well Billtill, no. The subprime portion, or the bad loans are a small percentage of the total Securities that were issued based on these loans. Manipulators found ways in a deregulated market to sell stuff based on the same mortage or group of mortgages. Sothat when one failed, many pieces of paper became troubled. The sub-prime collapse is one malignant cell in a metasticized cancer case. To that end, I offered you this: The models have been flawed because you can not set an asset hold on a 20:1 or a 30:1 or 40:1 when you have no <Expletive> idea of the value of the 1. Finance is a math based world. Every act that has occured by the government and Mr. Bernanke is to create a sense of some value in the denominator.
You can call me clueless. I don't mind. I understand the problems in spades. The banks do not know the value of the paper, the paper is a false construct based on massive fraud, and trust has collapsed. That is the Macroeconomic side. On the Micro side, the consumer is under inflationary pressure, mostly energy biased. That consumer is circling his/her wagons in fear. Less discretionary spending has resulted. They are redeeming securities and holding cash, silver and gold.
Now, you have claimed I do not refrence things and you finally tossed in an article I read that contradicts your point. You also conflate ARM???s, sub-primes, Ninja???s Derivatives, Hedges, and fundamental market forces. From the top, I have tried to give you every chance to look at things you didn???t know.
You, my sad soul, have been a name-calling, tantrum thrower. Please just stop now. It is not about Ideology, we have a Nation to save.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/17/2008 8:58:33 AM
Thanks for making my point that the fall of this house of cards started with the Subprime mortgages. Thats what started it, you even say it, admit it, but then still want to say I'm wrong. You just want to be right and me to be wrong. Thats funny...
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 3:21:11 PM
I wasn't agreeing with you, I was quoting you. After that I refuted you.
The fire was started in the trading pits, and Oil bias in our energy markets. That weakened enough consumers to turn a snowball into an avalanche. The crash is still happening. Now, people who were well within their means stand threatened. Check the timelines, think bigger.
Or just follow the money. With a finite money supply, who set records time and again over the last 24 months on profit? Mortgage lenders? Bankers? Brokers?
Oil monopolists.
Everyone else has taken a bath. oil bias in our model is the first flaw.
All of that money did not rush out of the Oil peoples hands into the rest of the economy, or trickle down. They have it, and shelter it, and pay very little taxes on it, if at all.
If you murder the consumer, then a system that relies on demand to make supply side work, fails.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/18/2008 6:18:25 PM
Braes: "The subprime portion, or the bad loans are a small percentage of the total Securities that were issued based on these loans." This is you quoting me? Sounds like you are trying to say that there are a ton of other loans based on the mortgages, therefore its not just the mortgage. But wait aren't those
securities based on the mortgages? Wouldnt that put them at the foundation????
-
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 12:11:25 PM
No, it was what collapsed the securities markets, and was pushed over the brink by energy prices.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/18/2008 7:04:23 AM
So all our money is held in Exxons vault? Obviously somethings not right about us paying record prices for energy while Exxon and others make record profits. But imagine a person is paying 200 a month pre-oil skyrocket for gasoline and now they are paying 500 a month. Also imagine their home energy bill has gone up from 200 to 300 (which is really not whats happened but just to extrapolate your argument). Thats an increased expense per person of about 300 a month. Lets also say that all other consumables have gone up 10%. So a person who used to spend, on average, 400 a month on energy and 1000 a month on consumables, now spends 700 and 1100. So their expenses have gone from 1400 to 1800. Do you really believe that this increase of 400 per month, as ridiculous as it is, would cause a person to not be able to afford their mortgage if they really did meet the original sub-prime underwriting standards required to get the mortgage in the first place? If a person is stretched thin, in this situation, its because they have bought and financed or are buying more than they need. When you can't afford your house you cut back, thats common sense. But you can still afford your house. If they can't cut back because they have payments for other things they have financed, well they weren't smart with their money to begin with, and consequently probably had a lower credit score before, revealing them as a credit risk. RELAXED MORTGAGE STANDARDS. CRASHING HOUSE OF CARDS.
-
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 3:26:12 PM
My motives are neither petty nor personal. On the petty and personal, you go there just like the talk radio types. I do feel sorry for you, and the education system that did not provide you with the skills to get the difference.
-
-
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 5:03:20 PM
Billtill has spouted these remarks, Many toward me:
1.We are witnessing the end of America at the hands of overzealous Democrats and there stupid liberal ideals.
2.Your still in college arent you? Freshman english? You think that has anything to do with the world we are in? Do you have a job?
3.If you want more go work for more. Giving a handout to make everything "fair" is stupid. Your fear of this disparity in wealth, and trying to "fix" the situation is going to destroy opportunity. And destroy the country in the process.
4.You guys dont have a lot of sense. All of the liquidity issues that credit companies are having now, like Lehman Brothers had, are a result of all of their foreclosures on sub-prime mortgages. That means they dont have money to loan.
5.Hey how old are you Braes?
6.Again, you guys don't realize what this discussion is about. I am talking about the difference in liberal and conservative ideals. You want to take everything as a personal attack, which is not what that was.
More exist, I just wanted a sample to hang on you. You have been really insulting, and for you it is really about the CRA and partisan politics. That is why the shrill Republican screamers have turned off the rest of the electorate. You don???t have ideas, you have attacks. You have spent so many years flinging that you show no capacity to debate in a civil manner. My reply is that again I have simply told you that there was an energy bias in the market manipulations. That this caused the mortgage holders themselves to head for bankruptcy and forclosure at a steeper rate. The rate of that collapse and it???s effects have slammed the credit markets because they no longer have the financial tools to estimate it and do not trust each other. They have plenty of money to lend, they just wont.
The trading pits and speculators started this. Derivatives and Hedges without positions to cover. I made Micro and Macroeconomic examples for you, and on many of the posts you contradicted yourself.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/17/2008 8:55:43 AM
Guess what Braes, all these comments...were correct.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 12:12:48 PM
Your coments were personal attacks, laced with opinion. You have now argued the circle at least 4 times.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/18/2008 6:38:20 AM
I asked if you had a job for a valid reason. People who don't work in this country, for the most part, are the people that don't understand why it makes no sense to take from the rich and give to the poor. What you and Doc represent, cue the personal attack (you two have earned this), the extremely small minority of the truly stupid. I suspect in reality you are Andrew Romano or some other contributor to this liberal rag posing as someone else. Spin away, Obama loses in '08. I will be back here post election, we can talk about it then.
-
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/17/2008 5:03:33 PM
Here's something else that's correct, Bill...you are a spammer. You have nothing to say, so you say it over and over again. What on Earth makes you think anyone reads the email forwards you feverishly post all over every single article on Newsweek?
-
-
-
Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/16/2008 8:42:33 PM
Even Bill Clinton points to liberal Congressional Democrats??? protection of Fannie and Freddie from scrutiny as a primary cause of the current economic meltdown.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsynspIqAoE
To prove Bill Clinton's point, this is a link to a C-SPAN video clip of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix fannie and freddie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 10:33:29 PM
Associated Press Wire Story
updated 7:48 a.m. CT, Fri., Nov. 16, 2007
CAPE TOWN, South Africa - U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson expects more of the losses in the U.S. mortgage industry
"The subprime market, parts of it will get worse before it gets better," he said. This reflects the fact that some of the most lax underwriting for mortgages occurred in 2005 and 2006, and many of these loans are still operating under low introductory rates, he said. As they reset, more defaults are likely.
Still, Paulson said the mortgage problems aren't a "black hole" and the U.S. economy will weather the turbulence and continue to grow.
Was Bill Clinton President in 2005/6 when the Republicans ran everything? Had the Republicans not had several congresses and at least 3 treasury secretaries to get after this? Well, don't let Paulson trip up your stuff.-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 10:42:46 PM
And to innoculate the point from a claim by some other soul that this also proves his point, Check the curves on energy prices and their effect on the economy. Look in FOrbes magazine like I did today. I can not cut and paste the flash player output for you, but you can navigate toward it. You will find that the fed reduced rates to insert more money into the fire as oil boys were gobbling them up and reporting record profits. You will find that consumer borrowing and liquidity, unemployment, retail sales, housing starts, and tons of other data show an energy price effect. I spent about 4-5 hours today chewing through it.
A root input in our economy is energy. The last huge ('73) market calamity was directly tied to Oil Price shocks from the Arab Oil Embargo, the act of a Cartel.
Now, if one wanted, they could continue to point to the CRA.
I'd look at speculation in the trading pits, energy price bias, historical charts that display cause and effect, and some fundamentals about banking and finance.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 7:40:55 PM
Obama in this video, addressing his work with ACORN litigation relating to the community reinvestment act and the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, as they relate to the current real estate and financial crisis, states that, and I quote:
"Subprime lending started out as a good idea, helping Americans buy homes who previously could not afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out among investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky, and more diversified."
He further states:
"The original idea was a good one, which was, lets see if we can distribute risk more broadly, and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might not be able to get one."
Listen for yourself. You cannot dispute the mans on words recorded live:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related
Obama in this second video is campaigning at a convention of Acorn and I believe two other "Community Activist" organizations. Ask if he will be their ally if he becomes President, Obama says, quote:
"Yes, but let me say that before I even get inaugurated, during the transition we are going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda. We're going to be having meetings all across the country with community organizations so that you have input into the agenda for the next presidency of the United States of America."
See and hear it for yourself. Obama promised that Acorn and other groups like it will setting his agenda if elected:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU
See also: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164972
Stating that Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn't what caused the meltdown, and noting that "economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been."
See also:
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=808692&boardsparam=Page%3d2
Below is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
See also
http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 from this web site. (oops!) stating that Freddie Mac was spending tax payer money to target Republicans in 2005 who were trying to regulate Fannie and Freddies fraud. Democrats were not targeted, as the were all in the tank with Fannie and Freddie to kill the regulations. Hear that, the article admits that Republicans were trying to regulate Freddie and Fannie, and Democrats were trying to stop it from happening as a means to facilitate the Community Reinvestment Act.
-
Posted By: LaVern @ 10/21/2008 1:18:48 PM
It's about time we have an "End of the 'Ownership Society'" as written by Zachary Karabell in the October 20 issue of NEWSWEEK. President Bush envisioned a country with everyone owning homes when he was running for reelection in 2004. It all started at the end of President Clinton's Administration when he got rid of the GLASS-STEAGALL ACT, which kept theCommercial Banks separate from the Investment Banks and the Stock Market. The so-called conservative President George W. Bush got in bed with the HEDGE FUND DEALERS, who promoted EXOTIC DERIVATIVES, which are virtually WORTHLESS or WORSE. Many books have been written about how this all happened, some concerning ENRON and President Bush's good friend, Kenneth Lay. Like the article states, "Bush pushed new policies encouraging home ownership, like the "zero-down-payment initiative," which was much as it sounds--a government-sponsored program, that allowed people to get mortgages without a down payment. More exotic mortgages followed, including ones with no monthly paymnets for the first two years. Other mortgages required no documentation other than the say-so of the borrowers. Absurd though these all were, they paled in comparison to the financial innovations that grew out of the mortgages--derivatives built on other derivatives, packaged and repackaged until no one could identify what they contained and how much they were, in fact, worth." What both presidential candidates should do, is to announce who they want for Treasury Secretary before the election. At this point, I don't trust Fed Chm Bernanke or Treasury Secretary Paulson to handle the $700 billion plus Bailout. The new secretary should be someone not associated with the Investment Banks or the Stock Market. It should be a relatively conservative banker who knows something about how a Commercial Bank should be run in the areas involving home loans without HEDGE FUNDS and DERIVATIVES. Something us rural farmers can understand and if the FBI looks into the problem and tells the new president what they found, they will come to the conclusion that DERIVATIVES are less than WORTHLESS, somewhat like counterfeiters and you certainly wouldn't reward a counterfeiter by bailing them out. Also, like Senators Obama and Biden stated, they want to tax the offshore tax havens where there is no form of accounting or auditing and it is where the federal government could pick up billions of dollars which is desperately needed,rather than borrowing from Social Security. That's why us voters, voted 99-1 against the Bailout. We can read and I give the media credit for informing us, even though it is a little late.
Yours truly, Disgusted Middleclass Taxpayer, LaVern Isely
-
Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/20/2008 6:34:31 PM
Who "Joe the plumber" may be is not the issue, though it's easy to see why the Dems want it to be. That's because the real issue is what Obama's comments to him revealed about Obama. In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, Davis, Ayers, Wright, etc., and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive branch without any effective restraint, and you have something that should causes concern even among moderate Democrats.
See Wall Street Journal: A Liberal Supermajority:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html
And whether McCain won or lost the third debate is also not relevant. He succeeded in the first half hour to plant the seeds of a Reagan style wipeout. Reputable historians and economists overwhelmingly agree that the taxation imposed by Hoover and FDR, and the "stimulus" spending and public works programs of FDR, actually deepened and prolonged the Great Depression. It was the production demands of WWII that got the economy going again. And when the war was over, the economy promptly went into recession.
See e.g. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/03/opinion/main4499465.shtml
And
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx
Point is, Obama's programs are to tax, and it does not really matter who he taxes, those taxes are going to be passed through the economy. He has to tax, because it is they only way he can pay for his massive social engineering experiments. Any first year economics student knows that taxation is a tool used to contract an economy experiencing inflation, because it reduces demand by reducing the amount of money individuals and businesses have to spend. It is contractionary, which is exactly what you do not want to do when the problem is that the economy is contracting already into recession. Like Hoover and FDR, Obama's plans will only make it worse for longer.
-
Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/20/2008 6:34:21 PM
Look and listen for yourself. Hear Obama in his own words discusses his links to both ACORN and the mortgage meltdown, and praises bundling and securitizing mortgages by banks as a means to float loans to the poor. Never mind the link commentators point of view, just listen to what Obama says in his own words. A picture is worth a thousand words. Maybe more in the case of the last half of the second link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related
See also:
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=808692&boardsparam=Page%3d2
This is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
The link below contains a purported list of the top 25 in Congress who got contributions from the folks at Fannie and Freddie. Obama is listed third, after Dodd and Kerry, even though Obama is just a junior Senator. Obama is followed next by Clinton. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi are on the list as well.
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080918
And the link below describes how some Democrats in Congress tried to use the original version of the bailout bill to divert money eventually recovered to groups like ACORN, a group Obama has a long association with. See:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247015469280723.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/20/2008 2:53:19 PM
Censorship. What happened to NowForTheTruths post?
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/13/2008 1:16:32 PM
George Bush did not create this mess. Granted he is an idiot, but houses for the poor is a liberal ideal, not a conservative one. If anything he is guilty of jumping on the bandwagon, and why shouldn't he. You would not get many votes by condemning the apparent success of the housing boom and the relaxed mortgage standards in 2004. Quit trying to lay blame elsewhere, its the liberal take from the rich give the poor mentality that caused this problem.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/13/2008 1:20:44 PM
Houses for the poor didn't cause the problem.
Half-bright middle class folks who just HAD to have that $400,000 house caused the problem, along with greedy mortgage brokers who took their commissions and ran.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/13/2008 1:28:36 PM
How many "poor" people bought houses that otherwise could not have had them prior to the relaxation of the mortgage standards? Do you know the figure? Do you know what percentage of these people are now in foreclosure? I agree there is a percentage of people in foreclosure that fit the category you describe, but the bottom line is that the liberal goal was to relax standards so that families with low income or bad credit could get a home. Liberals want to make everything fair and happy for all. This is a childish view of the world.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/13/2008 1:37:27 PM
That's not the question. The question is, what percentage of the trillion or so lost came from CRA loans? Even if every single CRA loan defaulted, we would not be in nearly this much trouble.
Ranting about liberals may make you feel better, but it isn't addressing the problem.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/13/2008 3:06:47 PM
The trillion or so lost in the stock market? This is the obviously direct result of fears of the public associated with the mortgage meltdown. Everyone is selling all their shares because the government has them believing they are going to lose it all. The bottom line, and everyone knows it, is the fact that relaxed mortgage standards have caused this meltdown, from the foreclosures to the weakened stock market. Sure credit card companies and big business are certainly a thorn in our side, but liberals DICTATE bad banking practices. DICTATE. Its like legalized corruption, vs secretive deceptive practices by credit card companies. The fact is we will always get screwed by both parties, the difference is the policies of liberals compound our problems.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/13/2008 4:29:58 PM
Actually, the run on stocks has more behind it than just bad mortgages. It also has to do with the fact that many of our companies are no longer capable of running a business. GM, for example, has the lowest stock price since 1950...because they make crap.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/13/2008 4:36:44 PM
Ok, it is a given that there is more to do with the crisis than the mortgage meltdown. Would you please concede that the biggest factor is the mortgage crisis? That led to the liquidity situation amongst the major credit markets? And is therefore the biggest reason for this problem, whether the problem is real or concocted by the government.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/14/2008 11:32:49 AM
Oh, sure. I don't argue that the mode of failure was foreclosures. However, the market itself is fundamentally flawed, in that American companies have gone for the least common demoninator (shopping jobs out to Chinese companies that make crap, car companies that don't give a damn, etc). Many stocks were over-valued, and when confidence in the market fell due to the foreclosures, the market corrected. It was bound to happen...if it wasn't foreclosures, it would have been something else.
My worry is that the current rebound will only last until the banks fritter away the bailout money.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/14/2008 1:33:43 PM
No, the market would not have collapsed like this had it not been for the foreclosure issue. Its not an issue of the market correcting on all these stocks because just anything pushed them over the edge. The truth is stock market prices are completely based on consumer OPINION and confidence. If people are paranoid about the bailout, they will sell their stocks. That leads to increased supply which leads to falling stock prices. Without the subprime mortgage mess, this would not have happened, What you are talking about is the problems globalization causes the US. The health and value of a company to its owners has nothing to do with whether or not its right to ship jobs off to China. It has to do with the profitability of the company.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 9:42:50 AM
The market was tipped into collapse by energy pricing manipulations. There is no "free-market" in the face of foreign (OPEC) and Domestic Cartels. The Mortgage scandal was pushed toward a far more violent collapse by the pressure of energy bias in the market. Nothing happens in our economy without that input. The Argument about the end effect is a modified-limited-hangout for an audience that has a little more financial attention span than a pay-period.
You will note now the the Wall Street people are regaming the system for another few hundred billion. What they just had to have or the world would end a couple of weeks ago, is now touted as not right, not enough and the answer is more, targeted directly into bank purchases. The shake down will continue until the regime is changed.
Speculation in trading pits, not legislation, drove this off the cliff.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 9:47:40 AM
Suppose all these people hadn't defaulted on mortgages they never really could afford? Suppose all these people were living in apartments instead? Do you still think that given that scenario, the increase in energy prices would have caused a collapse like that?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 10:25:56 AM
Then the Republican who owned the apartment would be defaulting, as they are in rental properties that are upside down now, all across the country. A sheriff has stopped evicting renters for the landowners (mostly real-estate professionals) defaults as the renters are paying on time.
Again, the tipping point set off all kinds of flaws.
Now how bad was all of that crazy paper? Well I had a Veterans entitlement to a loan, but the Mortgage broker was able to get me a better deal in the market. I got a no down, low paperwork loan, by walking into the office with quite a few grand in cash to flash, and a piece of property in a really excellent location. I pay ahead of principal+interest every month on the two loans used to make the deal.
While my credit was excellent, it and I were almost no factor in the process. (My credit is still over 700, and irrelevant. My banker could call me for a loan.)
So don't let the facts get in the way here. White people got the loans, Good people have been trashed by the collapse, not all Democrats or Democratic voting areas are ghetto-slums of government housing, etc.
The problem began in the trading pits. (Derivatives and Hedge, Cartels and Finance...)
But hey, enable those greedy scum and blame the victims. (Don't forget to pay for your rape kit.)-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 11:35:16 AM
Are you saying that all of these foreclosures are on landlords? Because if they had noone to rent to (since everyone is buying houses) they would be more likely to be foreclosed on then if they had renters who couldn't pay? That is totally logical.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 12:48:19 PM
Of course I am not saying all of the forclosures are in any class or any group. That would be you there, champ. I am providing valid examples that rebut specific flaws in your pourous arguments.
You continue to follow a thread wrapped around your neck.
All of us are in the same boat. That boat is in deep economic trouble. You want to point to an event done by an opposition candidate as the root of all evil. That is a hard, if not impossible sell.
Market manipulations, ENRON economics, Speculation and Greed, Hedge-funds shorting with no position to cover, Deregulation, and as T Boone says, "the largest transfer of wealth in history" add up.
But hey, make it all about me. Continue to play away. I have the rest of my life to laugh.
Professional Politicians and the K Street crowd would be a better target for the invective.
Supply-Side-Reaganomics resulted in shipping away the jobs, importing energy from enemies, and paying for it through debt obligations to the last Communists standing. I'd call those a conservatives' observations. A conservative willing to vote for Obama. I am hardly at all alone.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:26:20 PM
I have also already conceded that there are numerous factors that caused this mess. Anyone who argues the subprime collapse was not the single biggest reason for it is not based in reality. Thats all there is to it.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 11:06:16 PM
You do not get to define reality, you have an opinion. Not really a coherent opinion, but an opinion. I also have an education, that I earned, and appreciate. You seem to have heard something somewhere.
Feel free to get the last word in. I am done mopping the floor with you. It's tiring. Really. You just are not any good at this. I like people who manage to understand the counterpoint, not commit errors in logic and resort to tantrums. Good luck.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/16/2008 9:17:39 AM
Look man, you haven't backed up a single thing with any figures. Here are some for you: (taken from http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/05/real_estate/foreclosures_rise_again/index.htm) "Once again, subprime adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) weighed heavily on the down side. Subprime ARMs, which represent only 6% of all loans outstanding, accounted for 36% of all foreclosures started during the quarter. In other words, 6.6% of all subprime ARMs went into foreclosure during the period - nearly 20 times the rate for fixed rate prime mortgages."
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 6:01:55 PM
You said it was all about Ideology, and now want refrences, and to turn this into an academic paper.
Look, just stop. After all of the insults you have flung, you now hang one article that makes several points, not yours. You magnify one part of the problem, ignore the rest, and want my reading list.
You can not afford my reading list. Posting the refrences and taking the time would be worth it if you at this point were seriously concerned in an exchange of ideas. You aren't there.
try the Financial Times of London, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, Foreign Affairs, Deutsche Welle, RIAN, Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Esquire, San Francisco Chronicle... among others, in Print.
I have an active non-retirement investment account. I put my money where my mouth is.
Let's face it. You are scared about things you have little understanding of, and have focused very narrowly on loans to minorities. (Not the mostly white people who used fraud to make one loan into several financial instruments) Is it racism? I offered you the out there when I provided that middle and upper-class people are losing their fortunes and homes too.
You are showing a lot of fear and anger. That is a horrible way to live.
I tried to just let you have the last word and walk away, but you have had to fling more mud.
It is not about who runs the government, but wether or not they will do the job. Republicans have said for 30 years that government is bad and the problem. Logic would hold, if you do not believe in something, why should I hire you to do it? All of the other stuff just proves you have a dark empty shop with nothing to sell but more division, more hate, more insults, and no remaining dignity.
Other than that, you people are just outstanding.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/18/2008 9:39:06 AM
If you don't understand why don't you just admit it.
-
-
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/16/2008 9:18:42 AM
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/05/real_estate/foreclosures_rise_again/index.htm
-
-
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:27:52 PM
Hey how old are you Braes?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 11:00:09 PM
Having lost on every point, you now want to argue with me about my age? I'll just get that right too.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 10:42:59 AM
T. Boone says it is about energy, and the largest transfer of wealth in history. I believe T. Boone, he has a long history of success in the energy gig. That money-flow was the firs upon which the rest of the paper burned.
Mr. Pickens is not in my political party, he checked that at the door to save the Republic from anarcho-capitalism.
-
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/13/2008 9:16:42 PM
Doc, I rarely get up to compliment, but you are spot on. The inbreeding in boards of directors is sickening. The amount of collusion and cronyism is beginning to make Putin's mafia look like a good system. (At least he has incompetents dispatched...)
The oil people tipped us into this mess on a steeper slope with the ENRON speculation games in energy. The bad paper was made worse as moneys evaporated from the full market and into Dubai, and other off-shore markets, beyond our incompetent regulators.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/14/2008 8:55:44 AM
You guys dont have a lot of sense. All of the liquidity issues that credit companies are having now, like Lehman Brothers had, are a result of all of their foreclosures on sub-prime mortgages. That means they dont have money to loan. That means less money in the market. Get it?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 1:27:30 PM
They have plenty of money to loan, full access to both the Fed and treasury, and have been fully guaranteed by the taxpayer. They don't trust each other. None of them know what the real risk/ moral hazard is. The models have been flawed because you can not set an asset hold on a 20:1 or a 30:1 or 40:1 when you have no <Expletive> idea of the value of the 1. Finance is a math based world. Every act that has occured by the government and Mr. Bernanke is to create a sense of some value in the denominator.
You can call me clueless. I don't mind. I understand the problems in spades. The banks do not know the value of the paper, the paper is a false construct based on massive fraud, and trust has collapsed.
That is the Macroeconomic side. On the Micro side, the consumer is under inflationary pressure, mostly energy biased. That consumer is circling his/her wagons in fear. Less discretionary spending has resulted. They are redeeming securities and holding cash, silver and gold.
Now, I only had to take a few hours of econ, and do not pretend to be the guru. I also am not blind to the obvious. (I have less than $500 in equities today.) I have Series I bonds, which I recommend. I believe in America.
-
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/14/2008 11:35:56 AM
Also, without significant capital gains taxes on the higher-end investors, the incentive is to invest in overseas sweatshops, rather than American businesses. This has weakened both American companies and American purchasing power.
If it were me, I'd give capital gains tax relief only on investments in American companies that don't offshore jobs.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: celticdreaming @ 10/13/2008 2:07:56 PM
You can't just point at one thing when it was a combination that cause this mess. However, WE, the American public, need to demand that the issues be fixed. CRA loans are wrong. Fiscally irresponsible no matter how you want to look at them. They make no sense accounting wise. De-regulating the financial institutions made no sense either. Human beings run those companies, and no matter what you want to say...most when given an inch will take a mile. Greed will win out. And credit card companies....those wolves at the door. Do you know that they specifically target people who have no income (like college students) since they know mommy and daddy will try to pay? Or that they target people who have declared bankruptcy, because they know that since they have declared once, they can't declare again, so therefore can tack on those huge interest rates and fees and then garnish wages for the astronmical amounts they want back? Not just what the person charged, but sometimes double and triple that.
And Americans who think that just because they are living in America, are entitled. They DESERVE to have that house. They DESERVE to have that new car. They DESERVE to have that giant flat screen tv. No matter that they can't be bothered to actually SAVE up the money to get it. Get it on credit! Instead of paying $800 for that tv, you end up paying $1500....if you make your payments on time. It used to be that buying a home was a SERIOUS undertaking. You had to work. You had to establish credit history. You had to have viable income. But in steps the government with the 'politically correct' thing to do...and all those principles go down the drain. My accounting teacher must be turnning in his grave. Loose credit and loan regulations is what is at the root of this problem. And Americans buying buying buying stuff they can't afford and don't really need. Importing JUNK from foreign countries, shipping our companies and jobs overseas, not manufacturing enough of our own goods, and bowing down to the oil giants by not demanding easily accessible and AFFORDABLE alternative energies and transportation. These ALL contribute to the mess we are in...and we let it happen by not paying attention to our Governement Representatives and what they were doing. We become so involved with our own lives, working, getting kids to karate, soccer, dance class, SAT courses, and then sitting down to watch Survivor and American Idol....that we don't pay attention to what is going on around us. The laws that are being passed that WILL affect us in the future. We let it happen.-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/13/2008 2:16:54 PM
Celtic Dreaming: That was the best comment made on NW ever. Hell, just turn on the TV and watch a commercial or two..."You DESERVE our product". Well, it turns out that our short-sighted greed has indeed made us deserve a thing or two...and we're getting it right now.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/14/2008 9:37:18 AM
About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'
'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'
'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'
'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'
'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. from dependence back into bondage'
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...' Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.
If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message. If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE,
ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 10:02:16 AM
A list I have seen in emails before.
Post Hoc fallacies, Appeals to Authority, Generalizations, and a racist jam on the immigrant.
I see very little "Apathy" I see outrage, I see concern, I see action.
The GOP/Management class has made a ton of money Union-Busting with those 20,000,000 Illegals, and engaged in class warfare by importing peasants, to create a slave wage state. It was tolerated by the poorer 'social-issues' voters the GOP needed to get over the top, until it cost them their jobs, their homes, and their communities.
As a Historian myself, the 1-8 list is a nice way to impress Freshmen. The average age of many "civilizations" is measured in the thousands of years. (Jews, 5766... Chinese 6000+... Indus-River Valley 6000+... Mesopotamian... Egyptian...)
Western Civilization is the new kid on the block.
Now if by spilling this stuff on the table, you intend to add some intellectual base for the decline of the west, it won't fly. The rest of the world still looks at us and to us.
Lately they have been completely amazed, in a most negative way. We used to be an example to be emulated.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 11:45:54 AM
If you want more go work for more. Giving a handout to make everything "fair" is stupid. Your fear of this disparity in wealth, and trying to "fix" the situation is going to destroy opportunity. And destroy the country in the process.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 12:38:23 PM
You do not know anything about me, and use the flaw of going to a generalization to create or support a fact, and then go in the other direction as rhetorical needs arise. It is a trick that is debunked in Freshman English.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:39:17 PM
Your still in college arent you? Freshman english? You think that has anything to do with the world we are in? Do you have a job?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 10:55:28 PM
No, retired, and have a degree. Keep up the personal slant. Hopeless looks good on you.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/16/2008 9:10:12 AM
So if you live in the real world, and work hard for your money, then how do you not get the inherent flaws in "Spreading the Wealth"?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 7:19:34 PM
Putting words in my mouth? I never said "Spreading the Wealth" I do however like our commonwealth, and it is all built with taxes.
I like roads, highways and bridges. Taxes pay for those.
I like schools, colleges, and libraries. Taxes pay for those.
I like the Military, a lot. I need full funding for Veterans care and to undo the privatization schemes that have failed the veteran horribly. Taxes pay for those too.
I like Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services. Taxes pay for those too.
I like a Justice system, Courts, Prisons, Community Release programs, and Drug Rehabilitation rpograms. Taxes pay for those, as well.
I could continue, but my point on this fragment is made. Democrats pay, and Republicans borrow from Bond Daddies (the super-rich Republicans) and pass the bills on to future generations of Democrats to pay. When Republicans are in Office, they loophole their buddies into schemes and sole source contracts to loot the treasury. They bust budgets and destroy the ecomomy.
If you want a civilization, you need an effective government. and to have that you must pay the bills. The Republicans want the benefits with none of the shared responsibility. They in fact claim government is the problem, so that they can try and give the jobs to buddies in the private sector who cost us more and provide less. (Think Tricare-Prime, the military Medcial system Newt Gingrich set up to give Senator Frists family business, Humana the contract, to make me pay for my earned benefits, and get less of them...)
Heck I could just go on for days, about what Ideology has done.
Bush is an Idealogue. Rove was his brain. Your party is intellectually bankrupt and robbing us blind.
Bush is at fault. He was in charge.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/18/2008 9:36:58 AM
So the Democrats are the ones that want to PAY? I thought it was the other way around, gollee gee. Braes you have shown me the light. All this time I thought that Democrats catered to those that didn't have, like lower income disadvantaged people, who CAN'T pay. Wait, that makes up most of your constituents. So explain to me again how putting a Democrat in power means Democrats will be paying for these tax increases? I never said I didn't want to pay taxes. I said I don't want my taxes going into some freeloaders pockets. If I am going to pay taxes I want it to go to the things you cited. Do you want to finance lazy peoples lifestyles?
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/17/2008 5:05:59 PM
Once again, Bill goes for the ad hominem.
I guess that means Braes wins.
-
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:17:05 PM
Why would you assume I'm referring to you because of what I said. I am speaking to the people who are expecting a handout. You guys are slow.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 10:56:27 PM
No, silly person, it is because you followed thread. If you aren't hanging it on me, post it elsewhere, like you did so that others may take you down too.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/16/2008 9:11:22 AM
Again, you guys don't realize what this discussion is about. I am talking about the difference in liberal and conservative ideals. You want to take everything as a personal attack, which is not what that was.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/17/2008 5:06:51 PM
Give it a rest, Bill. "Do you have a job?" isn't an illustration, it's an attack.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 7:21:40 PM
No, I take your personal attacks as personal attacks.
When you just make no point, I counter with an argument that is intended to make you explore a little.
You can quit now.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/16/2008 8:40:28 PM
Baby I'll be there to take your hand,
Baby I'll be there to share the land
That they'll be giving away, when we all live together.
So, in the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, and is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Yahoo, back to the 70's we go! So now we know that an Obama presidency really would be as if it were Carter's lost second term after all.-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/17/2008 12:15:21 PM
No, Joe the plumber is an unlicensed and uninsured hack, who owes 12,000+ in back taxes. He belongs in prison as a tax cheat.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/18/2008 6:34:48 AM
You and Doc, haha...want to dentigrate anyone who makes Obama look bad at all. You just said "Joe the plumber" belongs in jail. That reveals all I need to know about you.
-
-
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 4:08:55 PM
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/august-08-08/the-folly-of-obama2019s-tax-plan
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 5:22:30 PM
http://taxcut.barackobama.com/
Provides a calculator that will show your savings under the Obama plan. The article above is from a Conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute. or copropate lobbyists, on Newt Gingriches house organ. You can trust Gingrich, whose contract on America has destroyed us, or go look up your own data on a calculator.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/17/2008 9:01:24 AM
Thanks for that link. So you like the Obama tax plan?
-
-
-
Posted By: pleasebiteme @ 10/13/2008 5:34:59 PM
It's the greed of the banks and mortgage companies that got the economy into the mess along with stupidity of the people that received the mortgages without really thinking through the big picture or the greed in thinking that the value of their home will only increase so if they need to sell quickly they can and make a nice profit. While both Democrats and Republics politicians are the ones who didn't/did write/vote for legislation which may have/haven't been a factor in the current economic problems we are facing, I'm betting there are both Dem. and Rep. voters who were able to buy a house with these bits of legislation.
For the hardcore Rep. or Dem. voters/poster who only think that there parties politicians and politics are correct, you are all idiots-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 10:46:46 PM
What <expletive> me completely <expletive> off is the number of Representatives and Senators that do not even read the final mark ups of bills. If you had enough senority, you can likely ram through a bill that would require driving on the opposite side of the road on any road that recieves federal money, just to create chaos, get it attached at the last minute with no debate to something that had to pass, and the idiots would do it.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/14/2008 11:36:36 AM
Absolutely. None of these jackasses have our better interests in mind.
-
-
Posted By: cani77 @ 10/13/2008 6:20:25 PM
THE GREAT BUSH DEPRESSION
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
He perfectly predicted the current meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen next
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide ,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch , Fanny and Freddy Mae ,AIG
The government took them over because they are bankrupt. Even with the goverment nationalizing hundreds of billions of dollars in debt the stock market is crashing
the credit markets are frozen and all of us may suffer beyond anything seen in generations
McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand how its been broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use quantum mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.
Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He was the last to know somthing was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime. Check out this link to the truth http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a budget surplus like Bush did but a crashing economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit. Most of it Bush created and it will take decades to pay it back.
If you do what you have always done then you will get what you have always got.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why are the polls even close then ?
Mccains team just said they no longer want to talk about the economy.Instead they would like to spend time talking about obama
which means running the biggest smear campaign in history.
They think they can just tell you lies and you wont be smart enough to see through it
Let's teach him we are smarter than that
Stand up and hold them accountable
Bush isn't on the ballot this year but his policies are
Elect Obama Biden 2008
Check out this video of sarah palins interview and ask your self if she understands what she is talking about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r36Xc0GG4iQ-
Posted By: celticdreaming @ 10/13/2008 7:25:34 PM
why do you feel the need to post this same comment 4 times? 3 here and 1 more down below? are you trying to push out the other posters? Here is my response to you the FIRST time you posted it.
"McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy". That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand exactly what is broken. It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use complex mathematical models very few people understand."
So what you are saying is that Obama does? Cause he has an economics degree and has studied the root cause? Or hey! How about the fact that he has several people working for him that were central players in this mess? Oh yeah...He's gonna fix it. Are they advocating MORE creative accounting? How about NOT doing away with subprime loans? Bush inherited a surplus because Clinton did some creative accounting of his own AND he closed down a lot of military bases (which had negative affects on those local economies). Clinton is also responsible for NAFTA and some of our world trade agreements. Even Hillary stated that NAFTA didn't live up to what they thought it would do. So what's Obama want to do about it? Is he going to repeal it? Is he going to make the trade agreements fair? Is he going to bring BACK the companies who left? Is he going to stop the IMPORT of cheap labor into this country that is driving down the wages of Americans? Oh wait. He LIKES immigration.
I don't like either of them. Obama keeps taking about the 'average American'...but he still practices 'from the top down' policy and surrounds himself with people who helped create this mess too. McCain or Obama...different parties...same mess.-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/13/2008 10:15:15 PM
As an Arkansan, NAFTA made Wal Mart a ton of Money. The Clinton's might claim they didn't forsee this, but I would probably laugh so hard that I'd wet myself. Bill was good for business. Hillary had sat on the Board up here in Waltonville, and was not exactly unaware of the needs of the giant.
The politician who told the truth about NAFTA was Perot.-
Posted By: RO in Reno @ 10/16/2008 9:15:56 PM
NAFTA is a GHW Bush creation to move business tnto Mexico Specifically the Glass industry after the administration of Bush 41 destroyed it in this country by buying the three largest Glass manufacturers i nthe US and draining them dry as a bone and selling the hulk. The only state in the union that benifits from NAFTA is Texas.
Granted Clinton inherited it and signed it into law. an act I will never understand and makes Clinton a bit suspect for sure. But it was a Bush 41 trade agreement.
According to McCain NAFTA created 25 million jobs, it's a shame a few of them were not in the USA, but he didn't mention that when he was protecting it from Obama, which he still is of course.-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 10:34:44 PM
I hated NAFTA. Not Another <Expletive> Trade Agreement.
Corporate raiding and job destruction began under 41 in massive ways, and they rigged the bankruptcy of Pan Am and Eastern.
It's just the Bill was no friend of labor. He signed a right-to-work law here that was totally destructive for labor. Wal Murk did just fine too.
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/14/2008 11:20:17 AM
Hey, Bill...Of what relevance is that?
After all, the bailout isn't helping your average American, it's helping the jackasses who allowed this mess to occur.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/14/2008 1:39:05 PM
This is not about the stupid response to the financial crisis. I agree that the bailout plan sucks. This is referring to the reason for the crisis, which is voters voting based on who is going to give them money and politicians exploiting that syndrome. We are witnessing the end of America at the hands of overzealous Democrats and there stupid liberal ideals.
-
Posted By: Doc Howl @ 10/15/2008 2:36:13 PM
Of course the republicans had nothing to do with it, right? Right?
LOL. Grow up. Your party isn't the lone friggin' ranger.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:09:49 PM
Ok. I never said politicians weren't corrupt. On both sides of the aisle. Everyone knows that. Thats a given. Are you aware thats a given? I am talking about the difference between liberal and conservative ideals. And so far I have heard nothing from you or Braes to convince me why it makes sense to give money or credit to people who didn't earn it. Are you guys aware what we are discussing?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 7:00:38 PM
I never once, ever, said that FICO scores should not be a factor. I have not once said that Appraised valuation of a property should be a factor. I have not once claimed that any person should get a loan above their means, or the old magic formula of 30% of take-home=monthly payment.
In fact, if you would look below, I mentioned a bad default that defies these principles. So yes, I do get what we are talking about.
You amaze me. You need to attack just based on party. It's not about the problems, it is about party and ideology. You are part of the problem. You have been all Roved and Limbaughed up. You don't think for yourself, you are a dittohead. An uneducated, uncritical dittohead. You make me laugh.
What I have said over and over, and you have as much as admitted inbetween silly personal attacks and worse, is that the sub-prime mess is just part of the problem.
The root is in derivatives, Cartels in Energy that triggered the inflation, Defecit spending, market manipulation, and other things that were all possible in the markets we have now.
Most of the really risky changes have happened in the era of lock-step Republican control.
With Command comes responsibility for the state of the ship. That would be Mr. Bush. He has had ample chances to exercise choices. That is the articles premise as I surmise. So yes as a military man, I agree.
Now, do you think that a nearly 300% rise in energy costs has drastic impact on all facets of the economy?
Now, do you not think that borrowing from China to pay debts to cover tax cuts for the rich, while we are fighting two wars, and being gamed by OPEC on costs does not have drastic impact on all facets of the economy?
Now can you concede finally that these things have smashed consumers, who happen to be in homes too, whose homes are losing value as that market has tanked, drying up their equity?
Now can you not concede that without healthy consumers there is no domestic economy to speak of?
Now can you not concede that the root causes were collusion, cartel, deregulation, speculation, and gross mismanagement at the treasury, federal reserve, and White House Budget office?
Now can you not concede that the branch of Government with the greatest policy role is the executive. and that this executive was a complete imbecile and incapable of managing the Rangers, let alone a Nation?
Now can you not concede that Mr. McCain is wedded to the same policies and people who let this happen?
No, I suppose not. only 90% of the people realize we are on the wrong track, and you are behind Bush, shovelling more coal in the boiler, and willing to pick up speed so you can crash through those 'bridge-out' signs ahead and further demolish the state. For Bush people who are stalwarts, reason is not operative.
Ideology is not reason. Like religion it is a belief system.
-
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:31:18 PM
One other thing, if you will look back at the article we are posting on, the author is attempting to lay the mess on George Bush. Do you believe what he wrote?
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/16/2008 6:25:14 PM
Yes, Because Mr. Bush took a bad situation and made it worse by allowing multiple securities to be tied to a single property, and Mr Bush shoved deregulation past any sense of smart because of ideology, a triat you and he share, Mr. Bush never vetoed a spending bill until he had eliminated the surpluese of the Clinton era, buried us in debt borrowing for two wars, crushed our exporting capacity through tax policies that rewarded outsourcing jobs, and poured cheap money on the fire through his treasury secretary.
All of this was pushed over the brink by inflation that changed the ARM mortgage rates, and cost people jobs, and cost people more for products, goods and services as wages failed to keep pace.
The gaming on oil prices in trading pits set the fire. You can read the rest over and over again below.
You want to focus on loans you can not describe, to people you hate, and blame it on Democrats.
You also posted a decline of western civilization piece I have laughed at for years.
Bush touted the "ownership society" as a goal, and it fell apart on his watch.
Guilty.
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: SharedThought @ 10/16/2008 12:31:15 PM
In at least one respect, we are becoming MORE of an ownership society: As the federal government buys shares in financial institutions, we ALL are now partial owners of these institutions.
-
Posted By: ploughman @ 10/14/2008 3:39:55 AM
The notion that government has had the power to FORCE banks to make loans they didn't want to make just doesn't pass the laugh test. For one thing, the REPUBLICANS have been in power most of the time since 1994 and have been very pliable to the will of the banking lobbies. Look no further than the Bankruptcy Bill in 2005 for proof of that...when Congress should have been looking at the mortgages critically it was instead sticking it to the consumer. For another, look at how banks got the Bush administration to side against state laws to control predatory lending...they actively FOUGHT to be able to continue to do the subprime lending.
And the CRA didn't even APPLY to the likes of Bear Stears, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill and other entities. And many of the borrowers who got in trouble were neither minority nor (previously) poor. How many "house flippers" were anything BUT white males?!
Unfortunately, because the real explanation is more complicated than blaming blacks and Bill Clinton, the right wing continues to try to spread this canard. As if people will forget decades of preaching about how wonderful deregulation is. I don't think that'll happen, and I think the whole cynical strategy will further alienate blacks and also be costly with Hispanics. That latter group could throw NV, NM and CO to Obama this year in a close race.-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 11:44:54 AM
If you want more go work for more. Giving a handout to make everything "fair" is stupid. Your fear of this disparity in wealth, and trying to "fix" the situation is going to destroy opportunity. And destroy the country in the process.
-
Posted By: Braes @ 10/15/2008 12:53:21 PM
You have posted this same tripe all down the list. I do not see everyone as a communist there, heir to the McCarthy intellectual bent. Mr. Limbaugh might, Mr. Hannity might, but most Americans are soooo past that now.
-
Posted By: billtill @ 10/15/2008 3:21:50 PM
BTW, I accidentally posted that reply to the wrong message, which is why it is duplicated above.
-
-
-
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
- This was a love story. Gov. Mark Sanford on his affairMSNBC
- She didn't feel a thing. Father of a 13-year-old who survived Tuesday’s plane crashCNN
- Out, America, out! Chant from young Iraqi men on the day U.S. troops withdrawWASHPO
- I don't think it is a good idea. A doctor on mixing with flu-hit friends to become immuneBBC
Discuss