Page 11 of 21 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415161718 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 143 of 271
  1. #131
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    I didn't expect you to get it. No amount of explanation can shake a liberal out of their defeatist wet dream.

    Ive explained it over and over. Studied the collapse for going on 2 years now, left links on this very forum for all those interested in the truth to go and read.

    But then again there is no cure for self administered stupidity. Some people will never get it and to counter their progressive nonsense with fact may be litleral walk in the park for me but its nails on a chalk board for those so heavily vested in misery, blame and envy.

    You offer up only liberal drool, talking points. You have all of the economic know how of a Capuchin Monkey but claim to know the details that led to the 2008 collapse.

    Please ecxplain in detail then with links to reputable sources how it was the rich evil corporations and bankers.

    Please do so I can effortlessly cut through your pathetic arguments with sound economic knowledge.

    By the way "unbridled Capitalism" is known as Laise Fair Capitalism and it only exist in your delusional hare brained rants against truth.

    There were regs in place but there were no "regulations " against Fannie and Freddie buying and selling toxic MBS to investment banks.

    Your assertion that there is no consensus on morallity just proves my point.

    You defined moral relativism but were to dense to realize it.

    So post some more nonsense. You're easy.
    Liberal vs Conservative is nonsense. Neither is the problem.

  2. #132
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by hvacker View Post
    Pretty much. I missed the film Too Big To Fail when it came out but I just caught it
    on HBO last week. It seemed to follow the facts as I understood them. At least as they were reported. One point the film made was nobody wanted regulation because they were making too much money. Now we have more politicans wanting less regulation claiming it hurts business. Strange after that thinking almost sunk our country. All that power and money was a corrupting factor if not the engine driving people in position to do really bad things.

    A lot of people in power are sociopaths and have no sense of guilt. Everyone has probably known one or more on a personal level. Unless a person really analyses the sociopath they will appear successful, even charming. Great politician material. They work the system.

    People survived on this planet because they learned to co-operate. Like hunter/gathers they learned to share and to work together. We understand predators in other species. Maybe even admire them and their ability to survive. We have a harder time understanding a human predator. The sociopath is our predator. Often the Ann Rand mentality fits this discription.
    You dont know the definition of the word "fact" and its why that movie appealed to you acker..

    Ofcourse to you it was a documentary when it didnt address why the collapse and the bubble grew and festered.

    It was one of the most one sided piece of trash films Ive ever seen. Liberal truth and facts ? Thats a contradiction in terms.

    Do you know where the "evil bankers got their derivitives from ?? The movie didnt address that.

    Those bundled securities were packaged and sold by law by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yep.

    Freedie and Fannie have been around since the 30s. Why all the sudden did we have a economic crisis based on worthless mortgage backed securities ?

    Its called Barney Franks Affordable Housing Act and the Community Reinvestment Act.

    By the mid ninetees over 55% of all mortgages handled by FREDDIE AND FANNIE HAD TO BE SUBPRIME.

    For there to be a secondary subprime market, for there to be financing available for people to buy houses with no money down and bad credit those bundled securities had to be sold off to banks as investments with a AAA rating.

    Fannie and Freddie higher ups knew there was no way to assess the value of them because they bundled good mortgages with bad mortgages.

    Inv. banks have been trading derivitives and mortgage backed securities for decades. Its nothing new.

    But being forced by law by liberal idiot politicians banks had little choice and the banks that refused to participate like Wells Fargo suffered massive finds for "discrimination"



    175,000,000 fine for wells fargo.
    So thats just a bit of the truth. Keep posting your eat the rich nonsense and Ill clue in on some more.

    Like in 2002 when G.W.Bush tried to regulate Fannie and Freddie. Apparently he saw it coming.

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Elfshadow View Post
    Liberal vs Conservative is nonsense. Neither is the problem.
    Explain ?

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Elfshadow View Post
    Liberal vs Conservative is nonsense. Neither is the problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    Explain ?
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,909
    In GA's opinion there are two kinds of liberals at ARP:

    The first is the ones that truly do not understand what makes the world go around... they still think life is a bowl of cherries... they have not found the pits yet.

    The second are a group of folks that really do not care either way... they just enjoy playing the put-down game. It is all 'sport' to them to pick a fight and try to win the 'one-up-man-ship' of making the other person appear the fool or cause them to loose face.

    Regardless which one is present... they seem to not worry about the mess our country goes down into. I guess they are either insulated, do not care, or are plugged into the govt teet... which I truly wish we could cause to go dry.. permanently.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    Explain ?
    Liberals complain about the stuff that conservatives are going to do in office if elected. None of this stuff actually comes to pass. AKA cutting the balancing the budget.

    Conservitives complain about the stuff liberals are going to do in office if elected. None of this stuff actually come to pass. Stuff like full on socialized health care.

    When is it going to occur to both groups that they are being played?

    The stuff people complain about Obama, is the exact same stuff they complained about with bush, and the same stuff with Clinton for that matter.

    Lets take Obamacare. People like to lie this at Obamas doorstep but I really do think that we would have had this act even if Mccain had won and we had a republicn majority, with the other side complaining about it. People say that the healthcare industry hates it but, can you really explain why they would hate having several million new customers, and everyone locked in without any ablity to quit the system if they hike the price up?

    Again with Fannie and Freddie, and the communities investment act. There are people that made vast sums of money off of this act, that did not suffer the consquenses because government stepped up bailed them out. I don't think these where conservitive or liberal actions. I think these are acts of corruption, and it's going to continue until people lay aside their political differences long enough to clean house. I have seen GA mentioning stuff like this. It's time to stop complaining about the other side. There are bigger problems. I think we need to clean out every incumbent.

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    You dont know the definition of the word "fact" and its why that movie appealed to you acker..

    Ofcourse to you it was a documentary when it didnt address why the collapse and the bubble grew and festered.

    It was one of the most one sided piece of trash films Ive ever seen. Liberal truth and facts ? Thats a contradiction in terms.

    Do you know where the "evil bankers got their derivitives from ?? The movie didnt address that.

    Those bundled securities were packaged and sold by law by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yep.

    Freedie and Fannie have been around since the 30s. Why all the sudden did we have a economic crisis based on worthless mortgage backed securities ?

    Its called Barney Franks Affordable Housing Act and the Community Reinvestment Act.

    By the mid ninetees over 55% of all mortgages handled by FREDDIE AND FANNIE HAD TO BE SUBPRIME.

    For there to be a secondary subprime market, for there to be financing available for people to buy houses with no money down and bad credit those bundled securities had to be sold off to banks as investments with a AAA rating.

    Fannie and Freddie higher ups knew there was no way to assess the value of them because they bundled good mortgages with bad mortgages.

    Inv. banks have been trading derivitives and mortgage backed securities for decades. Its nothing new.

    But being forced by law by liberal idiot politicians banks had little choice and the banks that refused to participate like Wells Fargo suffered massive finds for "discrimination"



    175,000,000 fine for wells fargo.
    So thats just a bit of the truth. Keep posting your eat the rich nonsense and Ill clue in on some more.

    Like in 2002 when G.W.Bush tried to regulate Fannie and Freddie. Apparently he saw it coming.
    BW Bush (Bush Jr) saw this mess coming, he tried 17 times (not a typo, seventeen times) to get Congress to do something about it.

    Barney Frank and his cronies blocked it every time. Note Barney Frank retired from Congress when he had raped the system as much as he could get away with. Typical polecat.

    So take this FACT and tell me it is Bush's fault.

    I might add: Houston TX had a SERIOUS run with a housing bubble that popped in the 1980's... At the time Bush lived in Texas. So Bush KNEW from watching it in his home state what could happen.

    Now dispute that fact also.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    5,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    I didn't expect you to get it. No amount of explanation can shake a liberal out of their defeatist wet dream.

    Ive explained it over and over. Studied the collapse for going on 2 years now, left links on this very forum for all those interested in the truth to go and read.

    But then again there is no cure for self administered stupidity. Some people will never get it and to counter their progressive nonsense with fact may be litleral walk in the park for me but its nails on a chalk board for those so heavily vested in misery, blame and envy.

    You offer up only liberal drool, talking points. You have all of the economic know how of a Capuchin Monkey but claim to know the details that led to the 2008 collapse.

    Please ecxplain in detail then with links to reputable sources how it was the rich evil corporations and bankers.

    Please do so I can effortlessly cut through your pathetic arguments with sound economic knowledge.

    By the way "unbridled Capitalism" is known as Laise Fair Capitalism and it only exist in your delusional hare brained rants against truth.

    There were regs in place but there were no "regulations " against Fannie and Freddie buying and selling toxic MBS to investment banks.

    Your assertion that there is no consensus on morallity just proves my point.

    You defined moral relativism but were to dense to realize it.

    So post some more nonsense. You're easy.

    Who's EZ?? I have to tell you I'd hope you'd take a logic class somewhere so we don't have to struggle with your constant argumental fallicies.
    To enlighten you, posting "links" is not an argument. It's an apeal to athority that in itself is an argumental falicity.
    But rather than entertain your snotty attitude I'll share a James Carville's recent insight into people and their "links"
    "Americans seek out media outlets or websites to confirm their beliefs rather than challenge themselves with hard information. People use information for validation, not information. They use it like a drunk uses a lamp post."
    Happy hangover ~(.) (.)~ BTW You can't hang.
    Tracers work both ways.

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by ga-hvac-tech View Post
    BW Bush (Bush Jr) saw this mess coming, he tried 17 times (not a typo, seventeen times) to get Congress to do something about it.

    Barney Frank and his cronies blocked it every time. Note Barney Frank retired from Congress when he had raped the system as much as he could get away with. Typical polecat.

    So take this FACT and tell me it is Bush's fault.

    I might add: Houston TX had a SERIOUS run with a housing bubble that popped in the 1980's... At the time Bush lived in Texas. So Bush KNEW from watching it in his home state what could happen.

    Now dispute that fact also.
    Are these included in the 17 times?

    Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing

    H.R.2022 introduced on 7 May 2003

    H.R.2117 introduced 23 May 2003

    H.R.2575 introduced on 24 June 2003

    H.R.2803 introduced on 21 July 2003

    H.R.2897 introduced on 25 July 2003

    S.1508, introduced 31 July 2003

    S.1656, introduced 23 September 2003

    H.R.3507 introduced 18 November 2003

    Clearly, in 2003 and 2004 the issue of finance reform was not a priority of the White House or Congressional Republicans.

    In the 109th Congress (2005-2006), the House overwhelmingly approved (331 to 90) HR 1461, The Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, designed "to create a stronger regulator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." The Senate, still controlled by Republicans lagged the House in taking action. It is not clear if this was a lack of Republican leadership or blockage by Democratic leadership (filibuster threats). (Shout if you have links to illustrate this impasse.)

    HR 1461 remained stalled in the Senate: last action, 31 October 2005, referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

    On 31 July 2007, after the Democrats obtained control of the Congress in the November 2006 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced HR 3221, a "bill to provide needed housing reform and for other purposes." Among other things, the bill granted the newly formed Federal Housing Finance Agency "supervisory and regulatory authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks (enterprises)" (per CRS analysis).

    Pelosi's bill became Public Law 110-140 on 19 December 2007 110-289 on 30 July 2008.
    http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2008/0...id-nothing.htm


    “We can put light where there’s darkness, and hope where there’s despondency in this country. And part of it is working together as a nation to encourage folks to own their own home.” — President Bush, Oct. 15, 2002

    Eight years after arriving in Washington vowing to spread the dream of homeownership, Mr. Bush is leaving office, as he himself said recently, “faced with the prospect of a global meltdown” with roots in the housing sector he so ardently championed.

    But the story of how we got here is partly one of Mr. Bush’s own making, according to a review of his tenure that included interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials.

    He pushed hard to expand homeownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards.

    Mr. Bush did foresee the danger posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants. The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal. And the regulator Mr. Bush chose to oversee them — an old prep school buddy — pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.

    As early as 2006, top advisers to Mr. Bush dismissed warnings from people inside and outside the White House that housing prices were inflated and that a foreclosure crisis was looming.

    “The Bush administration took a lot of pride that homeownership had reached historic highs,” Mr. Snow said in an interview. “But what we forgot in the process was that it has to be done in the context of people being able to afford their house. We now realize there was a high cost.”

    Lawrence B. Lindsey, Mr. Bush’s first chief economics adviser, said there was little impetus to raise alarms about the proliferation of easy credit that was helping Mr. Bush meet housing goals.

    “No one wanted to stop that bubble,” Mr. Lindsey said. “It would have conflicted with the president’s own policies.


    Lawrence B. Lindsey, Mr. Bush’s first chief economics adviser, said there was little impetus to raise alarms about the proliferation of easy credit that was helping Mr. Bush meet housing goals.

    “No one wanted to stop that bubble,” Mr. Lindsey said. “It would have conflicted with the president’s own policies.””

    The president declined to be interviewed for this article. But in recent weeks Mr. Bush has shared his views of how the nation came to the brink of economic disaster. He cites corporate greed and market excesses fueled by a flood of foreign cash — “Wall Street got drunk,” he has said — and the policies of past administrations. He blames Congress for failing to reform Fannie and Freddie. Last week, Fox News asked Mr. Bush if he was worried about being the Herbert Hoover of the 21st century.

    “No,” Mr. Bush replied. “I will be known as somebody who saw a problem and put the chips on the table to prevent the economy from collapsing.”




    But in private moments, aides say, the president is looking inward. During a recent ride aboard Marine One, the presidential helicopter, Mr. Bush sounded a reflective note.

    “We absolutely wanted to increase homeownership,” Tony Fratto, his deputy press secretary, recalled him saying. “But we never wanted lenders to make bad decisions.”

    But for much of Mr. Bush’s tenure, government statistics show, incomes for most families remained relatively stagnant while housing prices skyrocketed. That put homeownership increasingly out of reach for first-time buyers like Mr. West.

    So Mr. Bush had to, in his words, “use the mighty muscle of the federal government” to meet his goal. He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

    Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Mr. Bush persuaded Congress to spend up to $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

    And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for federally insured mortgages with no money down. Republican Congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as Mr. West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view.

    The president also leaned on mortgage brokers and lenders to devise their own innovations. “Corporate America,” he said, “has a responsibility to work to make America a compassionate place.”

    And corporate America, eyeing a lucrative market, delivered in ways Mr. Bush might not have expected, with a proliferation of too-good-to-be-true teaser rates and interest-only loans that were sold to investors in a loosely regulated environment.

    “This administration made decisions that allowed the free market to operate as a barroom brawl instead of a prize fight,” said L. William Seidman, who advised Republican presidents and led the savings and loan bailout in the 1990s. “To make the market work well, you have to have a lot of rules.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/bu...pagewanted=all


    And it goes on. Really quite interesting.


    Anyway just stopped in and thought I was in the druggie thread, I'll back out and look for it again.
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Dacula, GA
    Posts
    12,482
    Quote Originally Posted by ga-hvac-tech View Post
    In GA's opinion there are two kinds of liberals at ARP:

    The first is the ones that truly do not understand what makes the world go around... they still think life is a bowl of cherries... they have not found the pits yet.

    The second are a group of folks that really do not care either way... they just enjoy playing the put-down game. It is all 'sport' to them to pick a fight and try to win the 'one-up-man-ship' of making the other person appear the fool or cause them to loose face.

    Regardless which one is present... they seem to not worry about the mess our country goes down into. I guess they are either insulated, do not care, or are plugged into the govt teet... which I truly wish we could cause to go dry.. permanently.
    One of your best posts there GA because you have hit on something that nobody has thought to define and point out (the different types of liberals posting on ARP) and you did a perfect job of it if I may say so. You nailed it and this is the truth IMHO. If I can add one other type though.

    A small number of liberals are dedicated Marxists who do want to destroy private enterprise and America as we know it. So I think there are actually three kinds of liberals here on ARP. The two you so artfully described and the third more debalical kind and IMO we have all three represented here on this forum. Thank you, thank you very much
    Last edited by glennac; 09-29-2012 at 09:51 AM.
    "I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle."
    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution."
    Barry Goldwater

  11. #141
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,909
    Quote Originally Posted by glennac View Post
    One of your best posts there GA because you have hit on something that nobody has thought to define and point out (the different types of liberals posting on ARP) and you did a perfect job of it if I may say so. You nailed it and this is the truth IMHO. If I can add one other type though.

    A small number of liberals are dedicated Marxists who do want to destroy private enterprise and America as we know it. So I think there are actually three kinds of liberals here on ARP. The two you so artfully described and the third more debalical kind and IMO we have all three represented here on this forum. Thank you, thank you very much
    Not arguing with you Glenn... however is your third group also joined to the govt teet? <grin>

    We really need to figure out a way to turn off the milk... PERMANENTLY!
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  12. #142
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by ga-hvac-tech View Post
    Not arguing with you Glenn... however is your third group also joined to the govt teet? <grin>

    We really need to figure out a way to turn off the milk... PERMANENTLY!
    To do that you would need to do something neither side wants. Competely shut down the federal government. Both sides use it for their own power and neither will give it up. Neo-cons, and progressives love it to much.

  13. #143
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    You all speak of government power, and while I agree with some of you, Fox news made a good point last night.

    The United States was the pioneer of government in which the office holders willingly hand over their power once their jobs are done.

Page 11 of 21 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415161718 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event