Dear Mr. President

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 9:42:22 PM


    Frank continued: "So let me make it clear, I am a strong supporter of the role that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play in housing, but nobody who invests in them should come looking to me for a nickel--nor anybody else in the Federal Government. And if investors take some comfort and want to lend them a little money and less interest rates, because they like this set of affiliations, good, because housing will benefit. But there is no guarantee, there is no explicit guarantee, there is no implicit guarantee, there is no wink-and-nod guarantee. Invest, and you are on your own.
    Now, we have got a system that I think has worked very well to help housing. The high cost of housing is one of the great social bombs of this country. I would rank it second to the inadequacy of our health delivery system as a problem that afflicts many, many Americans. We have gotten recent reports about the difficulty here.
    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have played a very useful role in helping make housing more affordable, both in general through leveraging the mortgage market, and in particular, they have a mission that this Congress has given them in return for some of the arrangements which are of some benefit to them to focus on affordable housing, and that is what I am concerned about here. I believe that we, as the Federal Government, have probably done too little rather than too much to push them to meet the goals of affordable housing and to set reasonable goals. I worry frankly that there is a tension here.
    The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disastrous scenarios. And even if there were a problem, the Federal Government doesn't bail them out. But the more pressure there is there, then the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing."

    See http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 9:42:02 PM


    And again what was Frank saying at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

    "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

    So who really is the liar that soaked the American people?

    See also: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/08/politics/main2335631.shtml

  • Posted By: ChristaB @ 10/23/2008 8:41:57 PM

    Oops, didn't know I couldn't make a hyperlink. The address to my blog is theodalisque.wordpress.com

  • Posted By: ChristaB @ 10/23/2008 8:40:04 PM

    I loved this article. Check out the analysis on my blog, <a href="http://theodalisque.wordpress.com/2008/10/24/consulting-the-learned-elite-on-fixing-the-economy/">Consulting the Learned Elite on Fixing the Economy</a> at <a href="theodalisque.wordpress.com">The Odalisque Project: Version 2.0</a>.

    Prescott I think still believes in "laissez-faire" economics, which seems a bit out of touch with what's going on. However, having a voice which cautions against regulation is always a good idea to make sure regulation doesn't go too far.

    Granger is vague and a bit unhelpful. I actually laughed at his letter. What's the solution to the financial crisis again? "Be British." Aaaannnd? "Put money in the banks." Ok, well what if that doesn't work? "Do something else." Thanks for the insight.

    I took the courtesy of bolding a statement about investing in green technology, because I firmly believe it will have a positive effect on the economy period. But overall, I'd say the biggest thing I got out of all these opinions is that there SHOULD NOT be a decrease or even a "freeze", as McCain has suggested in the debates. Efficient government spending in infrastructure, especially healthcare, will go a long way.

    I omitted any reference the laureates made to who the best man for the job would be, or at least who they think is going to win. After reading all that, I think its clear that McCain's proposed policies would not work. McCain is a courageous individual who is committed to serving the American people, but I think his ability to do so is impeded by his apparent inability to understand the financial crisis. However, it is my sincere hope that he will be involved in fixing the economy even if he does not win the election because I think he is a valuable player.

  • Posted By: Vote Now @ 10/23/2008 1:22:44 PM

    After 9/11, the US government started rounding up Muslims without cause and without due process of law, like we did to the Japanese Americans in WWII. The Bush administration called it's main internment camp Guantanamo Bay. While there are certainly many guilty terrorists held in Guantanamo, there are also many innocent American citizens who have been held illegally for years without even being charged with any crime. They have been tortured by our government. Some of them have died.

    Recently the Supreme Court ruled against the Bush administration in the matter of Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court Justices were NOT on the side of the terrorists. They were on the side of the Geneva Convention, that says you can not torture POWs, and on the side of US laws that state you can not imprison a person without charging them with a crime and bringing them to trial. I'm sure that like most Americans, the Justices who voted against the illegal, immoral doings at Guantanamo didn't feel sympathy for the terrorists. They felt sympathy for the laws of AMERICA, the land of the FREE, where even rat finks get a fair trial.

    Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the Bush administration is busy trying to build a smokescreen to hide the CRIMES they have committed. Those pesky weapons of mass destruction. Just think, the National Debt went up over 6 trillion dollars under Bush. More than 2 TRILLION of it went directly into the pockets of Halliburton, a corporation owned by the Cheney family. Halliburton is now a DUBAI corporation and therefore is not subject to US taxes. All that money they took out of the US Treasury is going into the coffers of a MUSLIM country.

    Did you hear about how the US government is being charged millions for Halliburton deliveries of sand into Iraq from Kuwait? Sand. Like there is a shortage of sand in Iraq? Another contractor shipped sand from Idaho to Iraq at our expense. Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz discusses these and other excesses of our current government's out of control spending in Iraq.

    Your grandchildren will be working like slaves to pay off this debt, so that the Bushes and Cheneys can live the high life in Dubai.

    Yeah, they're patriots, Bush&Co. They wear flag pins. And hide the money they stole from America in Dubai.

    And they want me to believe that Obama is a socialist. Right.

    In case you think McCain is any different than Bush, watch this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJUCU1UH2w

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 1:39:38 PM

      POW's? Are you serious? These are not POW's my friend. These are terrorists.

      • Posted By: Vote Now @ 10/23/2008 7:38:26 PM

        My point is if i say you are a terrorist would you still want your day in court or is it enough that i say so.
        Maby we could lock you up with out a trial and you could just take my word for it or would you want me to prove it. This is still america and we all still have rights and laws to live by if not then these people win
        because they took your freedom away.

  • Posted By: Vote Now @ 10/23/2008 7:35:34 PM


    Comment: 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: Vote Now @ 10/23/2008 7:35:24 PM


    Comment: 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: esq1991 @ 10/23/2008 7:10:56 PM

    I think a lot of the bluster on the part of Obama's team is the fact they are afraid McCain will win, and they seem to believe that if they and their surrogates (i.e., MSM) repeat something enough, the American people wil believe it and buy it; however, I think they are concerned it is not working and McCain could win because the gap is closing. Think about it: for all the money he has spent, shouldn't Obama be much further ahead if everyone loves him? I think there are a lot of undecideds or people on the fence who will just keep thinking about all of the information and facts coming out, and when it comes time to vote, just won't be able to take a risk on Obama.

  • Posted By: esq1991 @ 10/23/2008 7:04:13 PM

    For those who have posted that the subprime mortgage did not play a role and criticized me for my posts on that, why don't you refer to the AP article about Greenspan's statement today: "He said that he and others who believed lending institutions would do a good job of protecting their shareholders are in a 'state of shocked disbelief.' And Greenspan also blamed the problems on heavy demand for securities backed by subprime mortgages by investors who did not worry that the boom in home prices might come to a crashing halt." Do your research.

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 7:29:12 PM

      Agree 100% and i posted a comment about greenspan earlier as well. Do your homework!! Sit down and think about the issues at hand. Don't listen to a 30 second media clip or a doctored up article. Think for yoursleves and find the facts. Greenspan messed up with artificially low interest rates on top of Frank and Schummer pushing for anyone to be able to get a loan and then Clinton signing into law. the instruments were created on the notion housing prices would not go down and they did. BOOM, domino efffect.

  • Posted By: WidernessVoice @ 10/23/2008 10:41:46 AM

    If the candidates really are almost neck and neck, it just proves, once again, how receptive voters are to Rovian fear tactics! After the last 8 years, I cannot imagine why anyone (except the extremely wealthy) would vote Republican! These are not Eisenhower Republicans; these are extreme right-wingers and ideologues! It makes me so sad to think we may miss yet another opportunity to turn things around, and all due to lies and slime!

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 11:06:58 AM

      yeah good idea, lets vote for Obama so we can have that idiot, Pelosi and Reid running the show. That would be about as un-American as you can get. Pelosi flat out lies with every word that comes out of her mouth. Then you have angry Reid, typical democrat to be bitching and angry when they create the problems we ahve, who does not know his head from his ass. Finally I am not even going to start Obama because i don't have the time type that much. Bottom line on Obama IF he is president, we will see the great depression #2. We can get out of this slowly and painfully, but if Obama takes over with that congress, look out below. Death spiral.

      • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 11:57:42 AM

        Boy. You know, I was going to vote for Obama, but your insults, profanity, and bad grammar and punctuation have convinced me of your intelligence and put your opinions close to my heart.

        Wait, no.

        This is what I don't understand about politics in general right now. So many people get on these boards and essentially go "You're a stupid worthless idiot. And oh, by the way, please give us your vote in our newly forged spirit of friendship."

        It's like, "what?"

        • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 12:08:16 PM

          I am not telling you who to vote for, I could care less who you vote for. I just find it very funny when people think more goverment, higher taxes, redistribution of wealth, universal healthcare and so on are good for America when it is un-American. As for my punctuation, grammar, spelling...why do you care? I don't think intelligence has anything to do with how you type. I have to go back to work so I can make money and give it to people who don't deserve it.

          • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 12:37:36 PM

            Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

            " I just find it very funny when people think more goverment, higher taxes, redistribution of wealth, universal healthcare and so on are good for America when it is un-American."

            So are the corporate profiteering and monopolistic business tactics that have helped bring us to this juncture, at least in theory. In practice, it has become quite depressingly and consistently American. Credit card companies have duped Americans into modern-day debt slavery, and nobody wants to give those foolish but sometimes worthy people a second chance. They just want their money. I don't mind seeing some of it given back to the people who lost it - some may lose it again, but so did Wall Street. Oil companies have repressed their competitors and prevented us from helping solve the oil crisis because high demand for oil equals profits for them. I don't mind seeing some of that confiscated. Oil is HEAVILY subsidized through GOVERNMENT programs of exactly the kind you claim to be vehemently against and has cost America billions if not trillions by doing everything they can to lobby for a continued petroleum-based economy. I'm quite fine with taxing the hell out of them and "redistributing" some of that wealth into forms of energy that don't crash tankers on my coastline. I'm curious to know whether or not you put the Wall Street bailout into the same "socialism" category as the things you are so passionately against.

            The principle we're founded on is not "no taxation", it's "no taxation without representation". There's been a debate since the days of the Founding Fathers about how much government to have, dating back to the Federalists versus the Anti-Federalists. There is nothing inherently un-American with regulating commerce. In fact, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1,3 of the Constitution, otherwise known as the Commerce Clause, states: "The Congress shall have power . . . To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes." What you consider to be un-American is founded on YOUR view of what you think is American. You dislike it when people don't think like you. But in reality you haven't made an argument that's based on our laws and you don't really have the right to claim other people aren't as patriotic as you UNLESS you tie your argument in to legal, Constitutional, and historical principles. There is nothing inherently un-American about taxes, regulation of commerce, or a given size of government as long as the people get to have their say about all of it.

            • Posted By: whatamess @ 10/23/2008 6:48:12 PM

              Ok. Let's talk about that. I understand what you are saying. However, the system as it stands does not allow us the representation that our Founding Fathers had intended. I will concede the point that there is no feasible way to hold a popular vote on every single issue that comes before Congress. That's why we elect leaders to vote on our behalf. Unfortunately, our elected leaders seem to be content on voting on their own behalf. It was plainly spoken and repeated by scores of congressional offices that calls against the bailout bill were coming in 100-1 against the plan. Public sentiment was widely against this plan. Yet, what did they do? They voted for it.

              We also have a serious problem with these pork barrel bills that keep getting passed through congress. Again, elected leaders are not voting for themselves, they are voting on our behalf. That's what representation is all about. Yet, 6 million or billion dollars gets tacked onto this bill for a special kind of wooden arrow. Now, let me ask you. If you were asked if we should have spent this much money for a company to manufacture wooden arrows, would you have said yes or no? I would imagine that the majority of americans would have said no. The problem is, this kind of thing happens all of the time. Where does this money come from? Taxes. Who pays taxes? I do. Do I want to pay for this? No. To me, that is taxation without representation at it's finest.

              • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 7:02:48 PM

                " I will concede the point that there is no feasible way to hold a popular vote on every single issue that comes before Congress. That's why we elect leaders to vote on our behalf."

                Well said.

                I agree with your whole post. Congress needs to get back to the people.

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 7:00:31 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: phiomalibumalibu @ 10/23/2008 6:57:16 PM

    Most of the tech budget money and new development money goes to India and China. Most companies spend about 20 percent of their budgets on employees in the US, and the rest goes elsewhere. Perhaps it's time to reel this loose ship in.

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 6:06:33 PM

    Three surveys -- from the Associated Press-GfK, George Washington University and an Investors Business Daily/TIPP poll - - show McCain closing the gap with Obama.

    The AP poll puts Obama at 44 percent to McCain's 43 percent, compared with a 7 percentage point advantage for Obama in their September survey. The GW Battleground poll showed Obama's edge at 2 points, down from 7 points in the middle of October, while the IDB/TIPP tracking survey has the margin for the Democrat narrowing to 1 point from 5 points at the start of the week.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aWRlkNLTILM8&refer=home


    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27324419/

    AP poll: Candidates running nearly even 10/22/08

    Neck-and-neck results are a departure from many recent national polls
    WASHINGTON - The presidential race tightened after the final debate, with John McCain gaining among whites and people earning less than $50,000, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that shows McCain and Barack Obama essentially running even among likely voters in the election homestretch.

    The poll, which found Obama at 44 percent and McCain at 43 percent, supports what some Republicans and Democrats privately have said in recent days: that the race narrowed after the third debate as Republican-leaning voters drifted home to their party.

  • Posted By: gobbledegook @ 10/23/2008 5:23:35 PM

    Pssst, a word of advice. Deregulation is so yesterday. Word is out and the word is "transparency."

  • Posted By: 4astrongamerica @ 10/23/2008 11:20:32 AM

    Hey all you "Trickle Up" folks out there. It doesn't take a genious to see that stimulating job creation through business growth & innovation has a much greater and longer lasting positive impact than giving people a check for $500 or $1,000. This money is gone in no time at all, while jobs keep giving week after week, paycheck after paycheck. Businesses don't have to operate in this country. In a global economy, they can operate one place just as easy as another. We have to make them WANT to be here, make it beneficial for them to grow their business and create jobs here. Which would most families rather have, a once yearly giveaway or $500 or $1,000 every week. Let's weigh this out JOBS...UNEARNED MONEY, JOBS...UNEARNED MONEY. Responsible people want jobs, slackers want unearned money.

    • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 11:37:57 AM

      "It doesn't take a genious to see that stimulating job creation through business growth & innovation has a much greater and longer lasting positive impact than giving people a check for $500 or $1,000. "

      First of all, it's spelled "genius".

      Second, if American business had been known for "growth and innovation" over the last eight years, I would be more inclined to be charitable. They haven't. The oil industry has sucked massive socialized subsidies for years and years and methodically stifled competition from alternative energy sources while simultaneously harming the environment - *regardless* of what anyone thinks about climate change, there are plenty of oil spills going on. Meanwhile, the financial sector has "innovated" around liquidity and usury regulations and helped suck America dry, while simultaneously spending tremendously on lavish CEO salaries and corporate headquarters. They've wasted the profit from usurious credit card and loan interest rates and now need the same people they've been sucking dry to bail them out again.

      "This money is gone in no time at all, while jobs keep giving week after week, paycheck after paycheck."

      Where do you think a stimulus *goes*? When people get stimulus checks, you're right, they don't tend to save it. They tend to *spend* it on goods and services. Those same business owners that you mention above are the ones who end up with it anyway.

      A stimulus check isn't a welfare state. Nobody is going to go quit their job over a thousand-dollar check unless they're already making minimum wage, in which case the perpetually overfilled labor market in that arena handily provides another peon.

      Government's role in capitalism works best when it attempts to fix externalities like pollution, or encourage research and development. Giving massive subsidies to business creates a bloated, inefficient and dependent system, and that's what we have on Wall Street, in the oil sector, and in our agricultural sector.

      So you certainly haven't persuaded me to give the same companies that bleed the middle class dry any more money.

      • Posted By: 4astrongamerica @ 10/23/2008 12:38:36 PM

        It's called a typo. I bet you've made a few yourself but forgive me for not being a GENIUS, I'm just an honest, hard working, average Jane that does everything in my power to secure a bright future for myself and my family. I just want others to be held to the same standard. Obviously you aren't a GENIUS either or you would realize that I'm talking about tax cuts and "UN-earned Income Credit" for people that already pay little to none of their share of the tax burden. I prepare taxes for people every year that work part time or are unmotivated to do any better for themselves and receive fat checks from the government while I pay and pay and pay. That's not the American way. Education is free in this country K-12 and college for low income families. That gives us all the opportunity to pull ourselves up from whatever life we have been born into and build a brighter future. If you set low expectations, then you get low results. BTW...how long do you think that these giveaways at tax time benefit the economy? How long do paychecks of employees of small businesses stimulate the economy? It is like I said in a previous post, the comparison is short term instant gratification to long term future benefits. This is a marathon not a dash and we cannot win it pulling dead weight behind us. Small business is the only thing keeping this economy afloat right now. They have been innovative and efficient which is why they are successful. I don't want giveaways for anyone...NOT CORPORATE AMERICA, BUT NOT JOE SLACKER EITHER. I just want our tax system to be fair and not hinder hard working small business owners in their growth or ability to create jobs for the rest of us.

        • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 2:44:20 PM

          Okay, here is a particular phrase I want to point out from my post. "A stimulus check isn't a welfare state.":

          I DONT SUPPORT A WELFARE STATE. I do support occasional relief for people in need. There is a difference.

          I didn't propose anything other than the stimulus in my post. Like you, I don't support handouts on a grand scale to corporate America OR to "Main Street". I *do* believe that both stimulus measures *and* subsidies have their place.

          You really think I seem to think we should support people who don't work, and I don't believe anything of the kind. I never argued against jobs, and I'm sorry if you thought that's what I thought. But I think you're way off in terms of such vehement opposition to occasional stimulus checks.

          • Posted By: 4astrongamerica @ 10/23/2008 4:15:05 PM

            Once again...I AM NOT OBJECTING TO STIMULUS CHECKS THAT ARE ISSUED FOR A SPECIFIC REASON IN A TIME OF CRISIS. ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY DO NOT WORK FOR THE PURPOSE INTENDED, I UNDERSTAND THE EFFORT. WHAT I OBJECT TO IS ANNUAL CHECKS TO PEOPLE THAT DON'T PAY FOR THE SERVICES THAT THEY ALREADY RECEIVE AND CONTINUE TO GET EVEN MORE OF MY TAX DOLLARS WHILE I HAVE TO WORK EVEN HARDER TO KEEP UP. NOT ONLY DO THESE PEOPLE GET ALL OF THE MONEY THAT THEY PAY IN, THEY GET UP TO $4,716 IN EARNED INCOME CREDIT WHICH IS FUNDED BY OTHER HARD WORKING TAXPAYERS. I AM BY NO MEANS WEALTHY. MY HUSBAND WORKS TWO JOBS, I WORK A FULL TIME JOB, WE'RE RAISING THREE TEENAGE SONS, CARE FOR MY ELDERLY MOTHER WHO LIVES WITH US, VOLUNTEER, GIVE TO CHARITY AND ALL THAT I ASK IS TO BE TREATED FAIRLY. DO YOU NOT THINK THAT $4,716 WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN MY LIFE? I PROMISE YOU THAT IT WOULD, BUT I DON'T EXPECT IT OR WANT IT. I JUST WANT TO PAY MY FAIR SHARE AND FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO STOP HOLDING THEIR HAND OUT FOR MY MONEY TO GIVE TO SOMEONE THAT IS NO MORE DESERVING OR HARD WORKING THAN I AM. CHARITY SHOULD NOT BE LEGISLATED, BUT GIVEN OF FREE WILL. I'M ALL FOR A HAND UP, BUT HAND OUTS YEAR AFTER YEAR ONLY ENCOURAGE MEDIOCRITY.

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 11:36:40 AM

      Amen 4astrongamerica!!

  • Posted By: sallying @ 10/23/2008 3:50:57 PM

    The idea of Edmund Phelps to infuse businesses that employ low-income workers, should really strengthen the economy for all practical purposes. But in the current reality, such money will just wind it's way back to diverse places for the families of our huge population of well-meaning 'visitors'.

  • Posted By: mtinnj @ 10/23/2008 2:09:17 PM

    Where is the outrage? The only thing Congress can agree on is how to line their own pockets. Where is a unified energy program? Where is healthcare reform? Where is Social Security stability? Where is meaningful election and lobby reform? The only thing with a lower approval rating than the President is Congress because we keep electing the same people. It's time to remember that "We the people" are in control of our own future.

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 2:39:34 PM

      To add to that, the president does not pass bills alone, Congress has to pass it as well. Do people forget that?

      • Posted By: 4astrongamerica @ 10/23/2008 3:32:36 PM

        Oh, Congress will definately be passing legislation if Obama is elected. There will be no checks and balances to protect the American taxpayer and the purse strings will be attended by Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dodd...the list goes on . They are not called "Tax & Spend Liberals" for nothing. We had all better fasten our seatbelts, hold on to our hats (and wallets) because we are getting ready to be taken for a ride.

  • Posted By: 4astrongamerica @ 10/23/2008 11:40:17 AM

    If we cease to be an "Instant Gratification" society, all the regulation / deregulation, tax cuts or tax hikes in the world aren't going to keep us out of economic crisis. We need to become a nation of financially responsible citizens. That means personally making financially responsible decisions, but also holding our government leaders to that same standard. NO FREE RIDES. IF YOU CAN"T AFFORD IT... DON'T BUY IT, IF YOU MUST HAVE IT... FIND THE MONEY IN YOUR BUDGET BY CUTTING SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU NEED LESS AND SAVING FOR THE FUTURE. We also cannot let our guard down on National Security. Can you imagine what another 9/11 would do to our economy right now? It is more important than ever to secure our borders and build a strong military. Our nation has always had enemies and now is no exception. The only difference is that in the past, our enemies targeted government and military targets. Now they are targeting our people, our infrastructure and our economy. We cannot let them succeed.

    • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 12:16:14 PM

      Our "enemies" are targeting our ignorance.

      9/11 cost the economy $40 billion dollars or thereabouts. Lots of money. But we've now spent upwards of SIX HUNDRED billion dollars on trying to "fight terrorism", with a lion's share of that money going to attack people who have nothing in common with the attackers except a religion.

      I can guarantee you that a number of Islamic extremists are celebrating the economic collapse as well as the fact that they helped cause it by dragging America into a very dubious war with a country that was largely innocent of the attacks against America. We are angry with and ready to attack anyone who reminds us of the 9/11 attackers, even if the resemblance is completely superficial and we have no proof of any wrongdoing. Islamic terrorists want us to act exactly as we are - wasting our resources lashing out at everyone else in the world. We have, quite frankly, played right into their hands and followed their strategies completely. If they die in the struggle, they become martyrs that inspire hundreds more to their cause, and they are happy to have given their lives in the purpose. We assume that because we're killing some of them that we're "winning". We are, instead, losing horribly.

      • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 2:19:04 PM

        In response to the two posts below...

        I think the Afghani war against the Taliban and the global war against al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah and et cetera is quite valid, and so are those expenses. I think you two have no potential national security justification for the Iraq War, which is the lion's share of our defense costs over the last eight years.

        The threat landscape is vast against America. We have vastly increased the hatred of the Arab world against us via an unjustified invasion and occupation of Iraq - we've *swelled* the number of Hamas and Hezbollah supporters, even if we've been winning the war against al-Qaeda. I'm not convinced that the amount of money spent has been greater than that which would have accrued from terrorist action against the U.S. To reach $600 billion, there would have had to have been an attack costing more than $85 billion every year, more than *twice* the amount that 9/11 cost. More to the point, I think these wars have been waged in horrendously corrupt ways, enriching mercenaries and defense contractors instead of the more deserving Army. Genuine Army troops in Iraq didn't get better Humvees and body armor until four years into the war, long after Halliburton and Blackwater were making millions.

        As far as leaving them alone, I think you would be surprised how many more of them *would* leave us alone if we would stop interfering in the local geopolitics. Iran used to be a moderate country, eighty years ago, and a beautiful one, full of lush culture and art. Then the Prime Minister nationalized the oil because he wanted more prosperity to remain in the country, and in response to our losing free trade with the Iranian oil producers, we DEPOSED the Prime Minister, granting power to the Shah.

        Can you imagine the backlash if another country forcibly deposed our leader because they wanted our resources? Can you imagine the outrage and the backlash? It was the same for the Iranians, who twenty years later violently overthrew the Shah and installed an extremely pro-religious, right-wing leader who they felt could protect them better.

        My mother has an Iranian-American friend who laments what's happened to her country. She says that it was beautiful once, and now it is "gray and gloomy". Yes, I think we had a LOT to do with that. If we hadn't interfered with their government, I think the Islamic fundamentalists would never have gained the foothold they have. They'd still hate us, but they wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

        I think the more we interfere in their politics because we want their riches, the more opposition against us there will be. And it would be the same here if someone did it to us.

        I think you need to "WAKE THE ____ UP", personally, "strong".

        • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 2:37:10 PM

          well first of all we should have finished Saddam in the first gulf war then we would not have to do this. No justification huh? Wow. Our national security is not just on our home field. They were a threat to peace period just like Iran is. If you leave them alone many many innocent people will die. How you don't see that is beyond me.

          • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 2:50:22 PM

            "They were a threat to peace period just like Iran is."

            You can't just say this. You can't say "period" instead of providing a reason or a justification. You can't call somebody dangerous to America based on your say-so and nothing else alone. All you're saying is the a variant on the same thing you've been saying in a lot of other places - "I'm right, you're wrong, and I'm so convinced that I'm right that I don't even have to tell you why".

            It strikes me as very, very selfish.

            • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 3:10:15 PM

              i am as unselfish as they come. It is in my line of work and my charitable giving and my volunteer work. does that sound selfish. I jsut don't have a tolerance for evil. i don't have a tolerance for softness in terms of our security. i don't have a tolerance for those who sit around and wait for something to happen. You keep thinking what you want as there are plenty of you out there and that is what makes the world go round and people who think like i do will keep protecting you.

          • Posted By: TheVigil @ 10/23/2008 2:48:28 PM

            You have no justification for what you've just written, your argument doesn't use logic, and it boils down to "I think you're an idiot because you don't think like me". How on Earth are you going to convince anybody with a viewpoint like that?

      • Posted By: 4astrongamerica @ 10/23/2008 1:02:49 PM

        If you multiply the $40 Billion (your estimate) by the number of foiled terrorist attacks since 9/11, not to mention the benefit of maintaining our safety and way of life, then you can see that the war is possibly a bargain. Do you think it is an accident that there hasn't been another attack? Do you think that if we left them alone they would stop hating and trying to destroy us? How did our actions cause 9/11 and the loss of thousands of innocent lives in the first place? Do you think that people hailing "Death to America" are just joking? If we were just targeting the Muslim religion, then there are millions of Muslim-American's that would be dead or imprisoned by now. WAKE UP!

      • Posted By: marley07 @ 10/23/2008 12:23:06 PM

        what is your suggestion we should have done, sit back and negotiate across a table? Basically everyone including congress wanted the war after 911, but we seem to forget that. Have you seen another attack on our soil? Well my friend, we will probably regardless of who wins the white house, but most certainly if Obama wins. Why do you think the poll worldwide wanted him to win? Because they think he is good for America and the world? If the rest of the world wants him, that is the first sign for me to not want him as president.

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 1:57:53 PM

    See: 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." And also:
    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html
    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

    Obama in the last half of the this youtube link, says so as well..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related

  • Posted By: FreewayJackson @ 10/23/2008 1:55:59 PM

    Beautiful...now that many "main street" people who had good, not sub-prime, mortgages, have been forced into foreclosure by health care costs, unemployment and inflation caused by wall street, banks and shady mortgage brokers, and have tainted credit histories as a result... these hard-working people will not be given mortgages or credit because they are "not credit worthy". Perfect - let's kick them while they are down! Geez..hope that economist is not going to be advising the next president!

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse