The fact that we were able to lay the trap does feel pretty good

[sangha]

I see the wingnut are scared to explain why the repukes did nothing about Freddie and Fannie (besides give them billions of taxpayer dollars to waste)

Translation: "I just lost my ass in this fray and now am reaping hay for what I haven't figured out yet...but look out when I DO figure it out...then you'll be sorry...!"

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

 

[The T]

That would be true if by "Gubmint" you mean george bush*

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

WRONG. It goes back farther than that...

Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And Clinton Bolstered it...

The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities by Howard Husock, City Journal Winter 2000

And Democrats in Congress DENY there's anything wrong back in 2004 with Freddie/Fannie

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

You may cease now.

The CRA?? Really?

If it was so bad, then why didn't the repukes, who controlled Congress and the WH, repeal CRA? If they knew that Fannie and Fred were in trouble, why did bush* and the repukes give them MORE MONEY TO WASTE??

I'm sure it was the dems fault, right?

They were trying...or aren't you that adept?

 

[The T]

I see the wingnut are scared to explain why the repukes did nothing about Freddie and Fannie (besides give them billions of taxpayer dollars to waste)

Translation: "I just lost my ass in this fray and now am reaping hay for what I haven't figured out yet...but look out when I DO figure it out...then you'll be sorry...!"

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

Care to explain why the Democrats said there wasn't any problem? But here we are?

 

[sangha]

WRONG. It goes back farther than that...

Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And Clinton Bolstered it...

The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities by Howard Husock, City Journal Winter 2000

And Democrats in Congress DENY there's anything wrong back in 2004 with Freddie/Fannie

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

You may cease now.

The CRA?? Really?

If it was so bad, then why didn't the repukes, who controlled Congress and the WH, repeal CRA? If they knew that Fannie and Fred were in trouble, why did bush* and the repukes give them MORE MONEY TO WASTE??

I'm sure it was the dems fault, right?

They were trying...or aren't you that adept?

When did they try to fix it? When they gave them billions of dollars and forced banks to give no=money-down mortgages to people with bad credit?

 

[sangha]

Translation: "I just lost my ass in this fray and now am reaping hay for what I haven't figured out yet...but look out when I DO figure it out...then you'll be sorry...!"

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

Care to explain why the Democrats said there wasn't any problem? But here we are?

Like I said:

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

 

[The T]

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

Care to explain why the Democrats said there wasn't any problem? But here we are?

Like I said:

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

Circular Logic...Not playing.

Sorry.

 

[sangha]

Care to explain why the Democrats said there wasn't any problem? But here we are?

Like I said:

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

Circular Logic...Not playing.

Sorry.

Not playing, and not thinking either.

But deserve a trophy for running away from your own words

 

[asterism]

The tax-cut extension debate has the possibility of back-firing on both parties. The GOP had better not mis-read their recent congressional wins. If the coxuckers think that they were put there to whore for the wealthy they can be bounced next election.
The GOP was put there to cut spending and restore fiscal sanity. If they fail they will lose in 2012, then they can whine about us RINOs. We're watchin what they do, not what they say...

Absolutely.

The time for games is past. If they can't deliver results they deserve to get kicked out also.

 

[asterism]

No one hires someone because they have extra cash.

They hire someone because they can profit from their labor.

If you only hire one person then you can not profit off of two.

The fiscal house MUST be put in order and these tax cuts are bleeding the US of revenue.

Go back and look at the economies we had when this tax rate was 90% or 70%.


The economy did just fine.

You're almost there, but you ignore the actual effective tax rate of those times, which was lower than now due to all the loopholes that don't exist today.

You are correct, extra money doesn't create a job. Extra money with a willingness to take a risk on hiring someone in the hopes they turn a profit creates a job. Raising costs certainly doesn't create a job.

 

[sangha]

No one hires someone because they have extra cash.

They hire someone because they can profit from their labor.

If you only hire one person then you can not profit off of two.

The fiscal house MUST be put in order and these tax cuts are bleeding the US of revenue.

Go back and look at the economies we had when this tax rate was 90% or 70%.


The economy did just fine.

You're almost there, but you ignore the actual effective tax rate of those times, which was lower than now due to all the loopholes that don't exist today.

You are correct, extra money doesn't create a job. Extra money with a willingness to take a risk on hiring someone in the hopes they turn a profit creates a job. Raising costs certainly doesn't create a job.

Not true.

If there's enough demand, higher prices results in increased profits for the business that is selling things and higher costs can be passed on to the consumer

This is Eco 101 (supply and demand)

 

[The T]

The tax-cut extension debate has the possibility of back-firing on both parties. The GOP had better not mis-read their recent congressional wins. If the coxuckers think that they were put there to whore for the wealthy they can be bounced next election.
The GOP was put there to cut spending and restore fiscal sanity. If they fail they will lose in 2012, then they can whine about us RINOs. We're watchin what they do, not what they say...

Absolutely.

The time for games is past. If they can't deliver results they deserve to get kicked out also.

Exactly. The people demand results. Not politcal footsie one-upmanship games for power of politicians.

 

[The T]

No one hires someone because they have extra cash.

They hire someone because they can profit from their labor.

If you only hire one person then you can not profit off of two.

The fiscal house MUST be put in order and these tax cuts are bleeding the US of revenue.

Go back and look at the economies we had when this tax rate was 90% or 70%.


The economy did just fine.

You're almost there, but you ignore the actual effective tax rate of those times, which was lower than now due to all the loopholes that don't exist today.

You are correct, extra money doesn't create a job. Extra money with a willingness to take a risk on hiring someone in the hopes they turn a profit creates a job. Raising costs certainly doesn't create a job.

Not true.

If there's enough demand, higher prices results in increased profits for the business that is selling things and higher costs can be passed on to the consumer

This is Eco 101 (supply and demand)

However? You have negated availability.

 

[sangha]

You're almost there, but you ignore the actual effective tax rate of those times, which was lower than now due to all the loopholes that don't exist today.

You are correct, extra money doesn't create a job. Extra money with a willingness to take a risk on hiring someone in the hopes they turn a profit creates a job. Raising costs certainly doesn't create a job.

Not true.

If there's enough demand, higher prices results in increased profits for the business that is selling things and higher costs can be passed on to the consumer

This is Eco 101 (supply and demand)

However? You have negated availability.

No I haven't. You're just too scared to admit you got pwned

 

[The T]

Like I said:

Care to explain why bush* and the repukes gave billions to Freedie and Fannie instead of fixing it?

I thought not

Circular Logic...Not playing.

Sorry.

Not playing, and not thinking either.

But deserve a trophy for running away from your own words

Not running from anything junior. Just I refuse to play your childish games.

 

[sangha]

Circular Logic...Not playing.

Sorry.

Not playing, and not thinking either.

But deserve a trophy for running away from your own words

Not running from anything junior. Just I refuse to play your childish games.

I beleive you!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No one hires someone because they have extra cash.

They hire someone because they can profit from their labor.

If you only hire one person then you can not profit off of two.

The fiscal house MUST be put in order and these tax cuts are bleeding the US of revenue.

Go back and look at the economies we had when this tax rate was 90% or 70%.


The economy did just fine.

Why aren't Dems campaigning on that?

 

[Trajan]

The real numbers dont agree with you.

Bush created very few jobs and then crashed the economy.

I love how you try and pretend for hack political purposes that Obama did not inherit a huge fucking mess fresh off the Bush presses

More straw. You should start a hay farm.

Or you could use facts, but we realize that isnt something you are very good at.

Let's look at facts:

Here's the non-farm payroll numbers from Bush's 8 years. NOTE: under the zero line is where we lost jobs.

Let's compare that to a successful president, Bill Clinton:

Note where the zero line is.

That's what facts, unembellished, unspun, look like. Happy?

it starts in 2008....

 

[sangha]

More straw. You should start a hay farm.

Or you could use facts, but we realize that isnt something you are very good at.

Let's look at facts:

Here's the non-farm payroll numbers from Bush's 8 years. NOTE: under the zero line is where we lost jobs.

Let's compare that to a successful president, Bill Clinton:

Note where the zero line is.

That's what facts, unembellished, unspun, look like. Happy?

it starts in 2008....

try this

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not playing, and not thinking either.

But deserve a trophy for running away from your own words

Not running from anything junior. Just I refuse to play your childish games.

I beleive you!!

But I still have you wrapped around my finger play toy. So let's rock.

 

[The T]

Not running from anything junior. Just I refuse to play your childish games.

I beleive you!!

But I still have you wrapped around my finger play toy. So let's rock.

Perhaps I could recommend some reading for Shanghaied?