GOP knows that Obama will win a gain in 2012! GOP have gone chicken and knows that the battle is al (805)
ttom500: Mr Minor details? The US government only has two political parties running it. Either one if they have enough offices and power can block the other on legislation.
The question you need to ask.....is why did the DEM block the GWB proposed regulation on Fannie and Freddie?
Here is why.
Both are quazi government corporations. Meaning they have both a government side of management and a corporation. They were both controlled in the later GWB years by the DEM. The DEM did not want GWB regulation intruding in on their turf. They were using Fannie and Freddie for low doc and no inocme housing leases. You know those financial instruments that went bad in the houseing bubble.
Clinton's administration had gotten Congressional legislation for banking that would have to lend to to no doc and low incomes. GWB saw the problem coming in the housing bubble. But teh DEM blocked him from doing anything about it.
History has details too.
The question you need to ask.....is why did the DEM block the GWB proposed regulation on Fannie and Freddie?
Here is why.
Both are quazi government corporations. Meaning they have both a government side of management and a corporation. They were both controlled in the later GWB years by the DEM. The DEM did not want GWB regulation intruding in on their turf. They were using Fannie and Freddie for low doc and no inocme housing leases. You know those financial instruments that went bad in the houseing bubble.
Clinton's administration had gotten Congressional legislation for banking that would have to lend to to no doc and low incomes. GWB saw the problem coming in the housing bubble. But teh DEM blocked him from doing anything about it.
History has details too.
I would be delighted to introduce you to a nice piece a learned fellow poster posted not so long ago!
"Republicans controlled the House and Senate in 2003 when the question of regulation or reform was raised regarding the GSE’s. Republican Tom Delay (a convicted felon today) represented Texas’s 22nd congressional district as the House Majority Leader. The
Republicans could have made changes to legislation had they decided reform of the GSE’s was necessary, but finance reform was not a priority of the White House or the Congressional Republicans in 2003. The fact is that 2 NEW programs were intiated under Bush’s watch by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in order to get a larger piece of the home financing pie. Fannie Mae’s program was called “Expanded Approval”. Freddie Mac’s was called A Minus.
“We must begin to close this homeownership gap by dismantling the barriers that prevent minorities from owning a piece of the American dream,” Bush said in a June 2002 radio address.
Building on Clinton’s goal seven years earlier, Bush set out to create 5.5 million new minority homeowners by signing The Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit Act. The act gave 2.4 billion in tax credits to investors and builders. In addition, he also signed the American Dream Downpayment Act that provided grants to help home buyers with downpayments and closing costs from 2004 through 2007."
Conrad73: Thought he wrote it!
I think a kindergartener could've done better.
mr1983: More of the same propaganda! The biggest creators of jobs in any economy are small and medium sized businesses. The same kind of businesses who are been choked of credit due to the banking and financial crises. So lets get away from this idea that the super wealthy create jobs. Its nonsense.
Bush and the republicans gave tax breaks to corporations to expand overseas. How does this help job creation?
Bush and the republicans gave tax breaks to corporations to expand overseas. How does this help job creation?
Grow up. Company taxes apply to all 'companies'.
ttom500: Mr Minor details? The US government only has two political parties running it. Either one if they have enough offices and power can block the other on legislation.
The question you need to ask.....is why did the DEM block the GWB proposed regulation on Fannie and Freddie?
Here is why.
Both are quazi government corporations. Meaning they have both a government side of management and a corporation. They were both controlled in the later GWB years by the DEM. The DEM did not want GWB regulation intruding in on their turf. They were using Fannie and Freddie for low doc and no inocme housing leases. You know those financial instruments that went bad in the houseing bubble.
Clinton's administration had gotten Congressional legislation for banking that would have to lend to to no doc and low incomes. GWB saw the problem coming in the housing bubble. But teh DEM blocked him from doing anything about it.
History has details too.
The question you need to ask.....is why did the DEM block the GWB proposed regulation on Fannie and Freddie?
Here is why.
Both are quazi government corporations. Meaning they have both a government side of management and a corporation. They were both controlled in the later GWB years by the DEM. The DEM did not want GWB regulation intruding in on their turf. They were using Fannie and Freddie for low doc and no inocme housing leases. You know those financial instruments that went bad in the houseing bubble.
Clinton's administration had gotten Congressional legislation for banking that would have to lend to to no doc and low incomes. GWB saw the problem coming in the housing bubble. But teh DEM blocked him from doing anything about it.
History has details too.
TTOM
They were using Fannie and Freddie for low doc and no inocme housing leases. You know those financial instruments that went bad in the houseing bubble.
Those standards were relaxed per Bush and Republicans in power at that time.
The Republican Congress of 2003 passed any bill it wanted with simple majority votes. If Fannie or Freddie were out of control they could have reigned them in. End of!!!!!!
This was all just a continuation of Clinton. It's over and done
Class5: Grow up. Company taxes apply to all 'companies'.
What did I say about "company taxes"? All I stated was that the idea that the wealthiest in society create most jobs is nonsense. And it is!!
mr1983: I would be delighted to introduce you to a nice piece a learned fellow poster posted not so long ago!
"Republicans controlled the House and Senate in 2003 when the question of regulation or reform was raised regarding the GSE’s. Republican Tom Delay (a convicted felon today) represented Texas’s 22nd congressional district as the House Majority Leader. The
Republicans could have made changes to legislation had they decided reform of the GSE’s was necessary, but finance reform was not a priority of the White House or the Congressional Republicans in 2003. The fact is that 2 NEW programs were intiated under Bush’s watch by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in order to get a larger piece of the home financing pie. Fannie Mae’s program was called “Expanded Approval”. Freddie Mac’s was called A Minus.
“We must begin to close this homeownership gap by dismantling the barriers that prevent minorities from owning a piece of the American dream,” Bush said in a June 2002 radio address.
Building on Clinton’s goal seven years earlier, Bush set out to create 5.5 million new minority homeowners by signing The Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit Act. The act gave 2.4 billion in tax credits to investors and builders. In addition, he also signed the American Dream Downpayment Act that provided grants to help home buyers with downpayments and closing costs from 2004 through 2007."
"Republicans controlled the House and Senate in 2003 when the question of regulation or reform was raised regarding the GSE’s. Republican Tom Delay (a convicted felon today) represented Texas’s 22nd congressional district as the House Majority Leader. The
Republicans could have made changes to legislation had they decided reform of the GSE’s was necessary, but finance reform was not a priority of the White House or the Congressional Republicans in 2003. The fact is that 2 NEW programs were intiated under Bush’s watch by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in order to get a larger piece of the home financing pie. Fannie Mae’s program was called “Expanded Approval”. Freddie Mac’s was called A Minus.
“We must begin to close this homeownership gap by dismantling the barriers that prevent minorities from owning a piece of the American dream,” Bush said in a June 2002 radio address.
Building on Clinton’s goal seven years earlier, Bush set out to create 5.5 million new minority homeowners by signing The Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit Act. The act gave 2.4 billion in tax credits to investors and builders. In addition, he also signed the American Dream Downpayment Act that provided grants to help home buyers with downpayments and closing costs from 2004 through 2007."
It good politics to aid minority home ownership by either party. But when the gap between Fannie and Freddie lending and repayment grew later in the GWB years...GWB proposed the new regulation...these reg were proposed in Feb of 2006. They would have placed a new regualtion agency over Fannie and Freddie and would have cut 1.4b in lending.
That is two years prior to the housing bubble collapse
Class5: Grow up. Company taxes apply to all 'companies'.
But seen as you brought up company taxes, it would be better to look at the tax loopholes that go along with these. Its amazing how many massive companies have a tax rate lower than the average worker. Some of these loopholes can be beneficial. But most are abused! And it is not just the democrats who seem to think this. The republicans think the same.
mr1983: What did I say about "company taxes"? All I stated was that the idea that the wealthiest in society create most jobs is nonsense. And it is!!
Well, you replied to my post about company taxes. You need to think this through a little. Policies such as the one you are advocating, if not treated carefully, have the potential to drive more large corporations offshore to tax havens.
Use common sense, not personal bias.
ttom500: It good politics to aid minority home ownership by either party. But when the gap between Fannie and Freddie lending and repayment grew later in the GWB years...GWB proposed the new regulation...these reg were proposed in Feb of 2006. They would have placed a new regualtion agency over Fannie and Freddie and would have cut 1.4b in lending.
That is two years prior to the housing bubble collapse
That is two years prior to the housing bubble collapse
Smoke and mirrors!! It is a well known fact that Bush policy helped fuel the housing bubble!! As did bank deregulation and lax lending. Which Clinton and his repeal of the Glass-Steigaal Act have to answer for.
But Bush's "ownership society" failed!!
mr1983: But seen as you brought up company taxes, it would be better to look at the tax loopholes that go along with these. Its amazing how many massive companies have a tax rate lower than the average worker. Some of these loopholes can be beneficial. But most are abused! And it is not just the democrats who seem to think this. The republicans think the same.
That is the same everywhere, even in Ireland & Australia. They plug one loophole and the accountants find another.
Class5: Well, you replied to my post about company taxes. You need to think this through a little. Policies such as the one you are advocating, if not treated carefully, have the potential to drive more large corporations offshore to tax havens.
Use common sense, not personal bias.
Use common sense, not personal bias.
I'm not advocating massive tax burdens for companies. A fair tax burden would suffice. And leave tax incentives there for companies who invest in R&D and job creation.
Bush gave tax breaks to companies to set up overseas! How does this benefit people in the United States?
Class5: That is the same everywhere, even in Ireland & Australia. They plug one loophole and the accountants find another.
Don't leave the accountant idea trick you? It is actually very easy for governments to come up with tax systems that will hone in on actual real tax rates. It is having the willingness to do this that is the problem.
mr1983: I'm not advocating massive tax burdens for companies. A fair tax burden would suffice. And leave tax incentives there for companies who invest in R&D and job creation.
Bush gave tax breaks to companies to set up overseas! How does this benefit people in the United States?
Bush gave tax breaks to companies to set up overseas! How does this benefit people in the United States?
By lowering the prices of consumer goods. You must understand how difficult it is to achieve balance in these matters.
mr1983: Don't leave the accountant idea trick you? It is actually very easy for governments to come up with tax systems that will hone in on actual real tax rates. It is having the willingness to do this that is the problem.
I watch this in action! Our government tries all the time, but wily accountants always find another way.Class5: By lowering the prices of consumer goods. You must understand how difficult it is to achieve balance in these matters.
But the question arises then that although nominal prices will fall, real incomes fall which will mean that real prices rise!! Double edged sword!!
mr1983: But the question arises then that although nominal prices will fall, real incomes fall which will mean that real prices rise!! Double edged sword!!
Exactly, the difficulty of finding balance in a globalised market.
mr1983: Ah thats better!!
Actually, it's pretty weak and simplistic.
Class5: Everyone is trying to find a simple and universal solution to the world's socio-economic problems. One simply doesn't exist. The art of government is more difficult than most understand. Politicians aren't stupid (despite popular notions) and each party represents various interest groups. Of course a party will try to effect change in the interest of those it represents, however, it cannot legislate to the point where other groups outside the party may be affected without risking alienation of potential future supporters.
Everyday in the halls of government, individuals are fighting to serve their constituents and therein lies the complexity.
Everyday in the halls of government, individuals are fighting to serve their constituents and therein lies the complexity.
Government has become too big and complex.
And politicians not stupid! You should come to Ireland. I think you might change that view pretty quickly. How many times over here they were warned by numerous economists and organisations that what they were doing was reckless and dangerous is shocking to hear but all they done was ignore the experts.
We elect government to create the environment to help us achieve certain things. We do not expect them to help create bubbles and then inflate them for political gain purposes. We do not expect them to join in the mania of these bubbles. They are merely stewards of the economy and should not get involved for merely points scoring exercises. Yes they must protect the weak and vulnerable in our society by use of different policies. But they should never encourage reckless lending, reckless housing policy, and lax regulation.
When Bush set out on his idea of the "ownership society" I don't think he would have envisaged that there would be no increase in house ownership at the end of his term in office.
When Bertie Ahern here in Ireland brought in some crazy tax incentives for property developers over here, I don't think he understood the dangers that are inherent in this kind of policy.
So whether they are stupid I can't say? But they sure did make a hell of a lot of stupid decisions!
mr1983: Smoke and mirrors!! It is a well known fact that Bush policy helped fuel the housing bubble!! As did bank deregulation and lax lending. Which Clinton and his repeal of the Glass-Steigaal Act have to answer for.
But Bush's "ownership society" failed!!
But Bush's "ownership society" failed!!
LOL Bush had less people out of work than Obama does now. He attempted to stave off the housing bubble. He fought two war while some jerks int eh world attempted to tie his hands. No names mentioned that.
He was in on the first TARP deal as the economy caved. But after that....we would just like to a American President and administration stand again. Instead of begging the Chinese for T-Gill sales, Saudi crude and some hip hop BBQ.
By the way.....has anyone picked up that President Obama actually had two birthday parties. One the hip hop BBQ in the White House....the other earlier in Chicago .....was a #38,000 per plate fund raiser.
He has unemployment over 9% and people losing their homes to foreclosurers......and he is having $38,000 dollar a plate fund raisers. He should be voted out of office for abusing his country and fellow country men in a time of recession.
Keep looking at back at GWB.....we will handle Obama in the next election for you. We got all the intelligence needed to change the Presidency again.
ttom500: LOL Bush had less people out of work than Obama does now. He attempted to stave off the housing bubble. He fought two war while some jerks int eh world attempted to tie his hands. No names mentioned that.
He was in on the first TARP deal as the economy caved. But after that....we would just like to a American President and administration stand again. Instead of begging the Chinese for T-Gill sales, Saudi crude and some hip hop BBQ.
By the way.....has anyone picked up that President Obama actually had two birthday parties. One the hip hop BBQ in the White House....the other earlier in Chicago .....was a #38,000 per plate fund raiser.
He has unemployment over 9% and people losing their homes to foreclosurers......and he is having $38,000 dollar a plate fund raisers. He should be voted out of office for abusing his country and fellow country men in a time of recession.
Keep looking at back at GWB.....we will handle Obama in the next election for you. We got all the intelligence needed to change the Presidency again.
He was in on the first TARP deal as the economy caved. But after that....we would just like to a American President and administration stand again. Instead of begging the Chinese for T-Gill sales, Saudi crude and some hip hop BBQ.
By the way.....has anyone picked up that President Obama actually had two birthday parties. One the hip hop BBQ in the White House....the other earlier in Chicago .....was a #38,000 per plate fund raiser.
He has unemployment over 9% and people losing their homes to foreclosurers......and he is having $38,000 dollar a plate fund raisers. He should be voted out of office for abusing his country and fellow country men in a time of recession.
Keep looking at back at GWB.....we will handle Obama in the next election for you. We got all the intelligence needed to change the Presidency again.
Come on Tom. You are raving now!! He attempted to stave off the housing bubble!! This is nonsense.
And the wars you are on about. He started wars in two countries while introducing tax cuts. You call this a good policy. One of these wars was started pre-emptively, feeding the American people lies into the bargain. How many American soldiers have died because of these lies?
And you still insist that the recession and the housing foreclosures are Obamas fault. they are many peoples fault. Not Obamas. Check this up!
Back to the war. People tried to tie Bush's hands going into Iraq because they knew it was nonsense. 650,000 Iraqis dead. And all because of lies!! And you seem to think thats ok.
So We will look at TARP! Isn't it amazing how the free marketeers are never slow when they are coming up with more government run plans! Lemon socialism at its best.
But socialism is bad, isn't it TOM??
mr1983: Come on Tom. You are raving now!! He attempted to stave off the housing bubble!! This is nonsense.
And the wars you are on about. He started wars in two countries while introducing tax cuts. You call this a good policy. One of these wars was started pre-emptively, feeding the American people lies into the bargain. How many American soldiers have died because of these lies?
And you still insist that the recession and the housing foreclosures are Obamas fault. they are many peoples fault. Not Obamas. Check this up!
Back to the war. People tried to tie Bush's hands going into Iraq because they knew it was nonsense. 650,000 Iraqis dead. And all because of lies!! And you seem to think thats ok.
So We will look at TARP! Isn't it amazing how the free marketeers are never slow when they are coming up with more government run plans! Lemon socialism at its best.
But socialism is bad, isn't it TOM??
And the wars you are on about. He started wars in two countries while introducing tax cuts. You call this a good policy. One of these wars was started pre-emptively, feeding the American people lies into the bargain. How many American soldiers have died because of these lies?
And you still insist that the recession and the housing foreclosures are Obamas fault. they are many peoples fault. Not Obamas. Check this up!
Back to the war. People tried to tie Bush's hands going into Iraq because they knew it was nonsense. 650,000 Iraqis dead. And all because of lies!! And you seem to think thats ok.
So We will look at TARP! Isn't it amazing how the free marketeers are never slow when they are coming up with more government run plans! Lemon socialism at its best.
But socialism is bad, isn't it TOM??
Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor!!
mr1983: Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor!!
---- IMAGE REMOVED because photobucket.com no longer allows embedded images ----
mr1983: Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor!!
---- IMAGE REMOVED because photobucket.com no longer allows embedded images ----
mr1983 what middle class?
Oh I don't know about that type of confidence Tom tho I do think you are trying very hard to influence people to think that here and collect data at the same time.
What just might happen is that America mobilizes again like when Obama got elected last time, remember. Usually the consistent voting blocks consist of the middle class white (often Republicans) and special interest groups like religious ones who will cast their vote for pro life candidates no matter what any other issues might be concerning them.
What do you think will happen if the election is actually voted by more of a cross section of Americans, say the ones who don't usually bother to go to the polls, the poor, ethnic and disenchanted youth?
I'm convinced that by now many more Americans than "just the same Ole same Ole" might get off their duffs and cast a vote. It would be wonderful, no matter who wins, if it truly reflected the will of the majority of American people.
What just might happen is that America mobilizes again like when Obama got elected last time, remember. Usually the consistent voting blocks consist of the middle class white (often Republicans) and special interest groups like religious ones who will cast their vote for pro life candidates no matter what any other issues might be concerning them.
What do you think will happen if the election is actually voted by more of a cross section of Americans, say the ones who don't usually bother to go to the polls, the poor, ethnic and disenchanted youth?
I'm convinced that by now many more Americans than "just the same Ole same Ole" might get off their duffs and cast a vote. It would be wonderful, no matter who wins, if it truly reflected the will of the majority of American people.
Ccincy: mr1983 what middle class?
The class between working/lower class and upper class!
Skybow: Oh I don't know about that type of confidence Tom tho I do think you are trying very hard to influence people to think that here and collect data at the same time.
What just might happen is that America mobilizes again like when Obama got elected last time, remember. Usually the consistent voting blocks consist of the middle class white (often Republicans) and special interest groups like religious ones who will cast their vote for pro life candidates no matter what any other issues might be concerning them.
What do you think will happen if the election is actually voted by more of a cross section of Americans, say the ones who don't usually bother to go to the polls, the poor, ethnic and disenchanted youth?
I'm convinced that by now many more Americans than "just the same Ole same Ole" might get off their duffs and cast a vote. It would be wonderful, no matter who wins, if it truly reflected the will of the majority of American people.
What just might happen is that America mobilizes again like when Obama got elected last time, remember. Usually the consistent voting blocks consist of the middle class white (often Republicans) and special interest groups like religious ones who will cast their vote for pro life candidates no matter what any other issues might be concerning them.
What do you think will happen if the election is actually voted by more of a cross section of Americans, say the ones who don't usually bother to go to the polls, the poor, ethnic and disenchanted youth?
I'm convinced that by now many more Americans than "just the same Ole same Ole" might get off their duffs and cast a vote. It would be wonderful, no matter who wins, if it truly reflected the will of the majority of American people.
Like you posted it's the same ole ,same ole every time.Maybe if political figures actually followed through that make in the first place and stopped lying more people may be encouraged to get out and vote.
mr1983: The class between working/lower class and upper class!
From what I see there is only the rich and the poor no inbetween class.
Ccincy: Like you posted it's the same ole ,same ole every time.Maybe if political figures actually followed through that make in the first place and stopped lying more people may be encouraged to get out and vote.
Many people seem to want to be lied to. Otherwise why would they keep voting for the same lies and liars year after year after year?
More Threads
Nature
everything is changing
How far is too far?
Salami, Salami, Baloney
1830's Music
Reality Check
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
rarotonga
Icebergs Still Around
What I Lack In Vocabulary
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Bush's "ownership society" will make sure that all Americans will be paying for these mistakes for a long time to come!!
Mr Minor details? The US government only has two political parties running it. Either one if they have enough offices and power can block the other on legislation.
The question you need to ask.....is why did the DEM block the GWB proposed regulation on Fannie and Freddie?
Here is why.
Both are quazi government corporations. Meaning they have both a government side of management and a corporation. They were both controlled in the later GWB years by the DEM. The DEM did not want GWB regulation intruding in on their turf. They were using Fannie and Freddie for low doc and no inocme housing leases. You know those financial instruments that went bad in the houseing bubble.
Clinton's administration had gotten Congressional legislation for banking that would have to lend to to no doc and low incomes. GWB saw the problem coming in the housing bubble. But teh DEM blocked him from doing anything about it.
History has details too.