Dad2three
Gold Member
Why can't conservatives EVER get over their simplistic ideas and premises?
Put Up, or Shut Up; What are Republicans offering the Middle class? Be Specific
- Thread starter OnePercenter
- Start date
Why can't conservatives EVER get over their simplistic ideas and premises?
Dad2three
Gold Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
How many pages will it take to bring back manufacturing that left because of too much regulation?
Maybe if we regulate energy to hike its price, would that would help?
Last edited by a moderator:
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Dad2three
Gold Member
lol, Right, it was 'regulation' that created the OPPORTUNITY to move jobs offshore *shaking head*
Last edited by a moderator:
Dad2three
Gold Member
Where?
AND? oh right Dems the minority party in the GOP majority House 1995-2007 had super powers when it came to Fannie/Freddie ACCOUNTING scandals of 2003-2004 they spoke of in the OUT OF CONTEXT vids
The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets OCT 2008
Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse
June 17, 2004
Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.
Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004
DUBYA FOUGHT ALL 50 STATE AG'S IN 2003, INVOKING A CIVIL WAR ERA RULE SAYING FEDS RULE ON "PREDATORY" LENDERS!
Dubya was warned by the FBI of an "epidemic" of mortgage fraud in 2004. He gave them less resources. Later in 2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 33-1 which flooded the market with cheap money!
2004 Republican Convention:
Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...
Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.
(APPLAUSE)
Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."
Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?
A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.
From BushÂ’s PresidentÂ’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008
“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.
"(In 2000, Clinton) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."
How HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis
"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."
http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/f..._090911_v2.pdf
June 17, 2004
Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.
Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004
Fannie, Freddie to Suffer Under New Rule, Frank Says
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would suffer financially under a Bush administration requirement that they channel more mortgage financing to people with low incomes, said the senior Democrat on a congressional panel that sets regulations for the companies.
So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush
http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf
ANYTHING ELSE?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
You're right, companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dad2three
Gold Member
You're right, companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions.
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs
By BRUCE BARTLETT
The table below presents the bureauÂ’s data. As one can see, the number of layoffs nationwide caused by government regulation is minuscule and shows no evidence of getting worse during the Obama administration. Lack of demand for business products and services is vastly more important.
The Wall Street Journal’s July survey of business economists found, “The main reason U.S. companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand, rather than uncertainty over government policies, according to a majority of economists.”
In August, McClatchy Newspapers canvassed small businesses, asking them if regulation was a big problem. It could find no evidence that this was the case.
“None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it,” McClatchy reported. “Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-9 and its grim aftermath.”
The latest monthly survey of its members by the National Federation of Independent Business shows that poor sales are far and away their biggest problem. While concerns about regulation have risen during the Obama administration, they are about the same now as they were during Ronald ReaganÂ’s administration, according to an analysis of the federationÂ’s data by the Economic Policy Institute.
Academic research has also failed to find evidence that regulation is a significant factor in unemployment. In a blog post on Sept. 5, Jay Livingston, a sociologist at Montclair State University, hypothesized that if regulation were a major problem it would show up in the unemployment rates of industries where regulation has been increasing: the financial sector, medical care and mining/fuel extraction. He found that unemployment rates in these sectors were actually well below the national average.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/
lol
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
NOTHING on my demolishing YOUR talking point? Typical
Where?
AND? oh right Dems the minority party in the GOP majority House 1995-2007 had super powers when it came to Fannie/Freddie ACCOUNTING scandals of 2003-2004 they spoke of in the OUT OF CONTEXT vids
The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets OCT 2008
Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse
June 17, 2004
Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.
Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004
DUBYA FOUGHT ALL 50 STATE AG'S IN 2003, INVOKING A CIVIL WAR ERA RULE SAYING FEDS RULE ON "PREDATORY" LENDERS!
Dubya was warned by the FBI of an "epidemic" of mortgage fraud in 2004. He gave them less resources. Later in 2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 33-1 which flooded the market with cheap money!
2004 Republican Convention:
Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...
Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.
(APPLAUSE)
Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."
Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?
A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.
From BushÂ’s PresidentÂ’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008
“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.
"(In 2000, Clinton) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."
How HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis
"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."
http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/f..._090911_v2.pdf
June 17, 2004
Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.
Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004
Fannie, Freddie to Suffer Under New Rule, Frank Says
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would suffer financially under a Bush administration requirement that they channel more mortgage financing to people with low incomes, said the senior Democrat on a congressional panel that sets regulations for the companies.
So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush
http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf
ANYTHING ELSE?
oh right Dems the minority party in the GOP majority House 1995-2007 had super powers when it came to Fannie/Freddie ACCOUNTING scandals of 2003-2004
Where did I claim that?
Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse
I think it's a mistake for government to push banks to make loans to unqualified borrowers.
Whether it's Bush, Frank, Meeks, Waters, Dodd, Cuomo or Clay.
ANYTHING ELSE?
Better luck next time?
Was there more regulation or less regulation as a result of NAFTA? Why won't you answer the question?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
You're right, companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions.
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs
By BRUCE BARTLETT
The table below presents the bureauÂ’s data. As one can see, the number of layoffs nationwide caused by government regulation is minuscule and shows no evidence of getting worse during the Obama administration. Lack of demand for business products and services is vastly more important.
The Wall Street Journal’s July survey of business economists found, “The main reason U.S. companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand, rather than uncertainty over government policies, according to a majority of economists.”
In August, McClatchy Newspapers canvassed small businesses, asking them if regulation was a big problem. It could find no evidence that this was the case.
“None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it,” McClatchy reported. “Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-9 and its grim aftermath.”
The latest monthly survey of its members by the National Federation of Independent Business shows that poor sales are far and away their biggest problem. While concerns about regulation have risen during the Obama administration, they are about the same now as they were during Ronald ReaganÂ’s administration, according to an analysis of the federationÂ’s data by the Economic Policy Institute.
Academic research has also failed to find evidence that regulation is a significant factor in unemployment. In a blog post on Sept. 5, Jay Livingston, a sociologist at Montclair State University, hypothesized that if regulation were a major problem it would show up in the unemployment rates of industries where regulation has been increasing: the financial sector, medical care and mining/fuel extraction. He found that unemployment rates in these sectors were actually well below the national average.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/
lol
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
The Dems, Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the crisis?
Well that's a relief.
Thanks for the article. Was that supposed to prove that companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions?
Dad2three
Gold Member
You mean BESIDES your out of context Vids where did you say it?
NO, GOV'T DIDN'T CREATE THE BANKSTER SUBPRIME CRISIS WORLD WIDE. GROW UP!
Dad2three
Gold Member
You're right, companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions.
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs
By BRUCE BARTLETT
The table below presents the bureauÂ’s data. As one can see, the number of layoffs nationwide caused by government regulation is minuscule and shows no evidence of getting worse during the Obama administration. Lack of demand for business products and services is vastly more important.
The Wall Street Journal’s July survey of business economists found, “The main reason U.S. companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand, rather than uncertainty over government policies, according to a majority of economists.”
In August, McClatchy Newspapers canvassed small businesses, asking them if regulation was a big problem. It could find no evidence that this was the case.
“None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it,” McClatchy reported. “Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-9 and its grim aftermath.”
The latest monthly survey of its members by the National Federation of Independent Business shows that poor sales are far and away their biggest problem. While concerns about regulation have risen during the Obama administration, they are about the same now as they were during Ronald ReaganÂ’s administration, according to an analysis of the federationÂ’s data by the Economic Policy Institute.
Academic research has also failed to find evidence that regulation is a significant factor in unemployment. In a blog post on Sept. 5, Jay Livingston, a sociologist at Montclair State University, hypothesized that if regulation were a major problem it would show up in the unemployment rates of industries where regulation has been increasing: the financial sector, medical care and mining/fuel extraction. He found that unemployment rates in these sectors were actually well below the national average.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/
lol
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
The Dems, Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the crisis?
Well that's a relief.
Thanks for the article. Was that supposed to prove that companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions?
F/F had almost zero to do with the Bankster WORLD WIDE CREDIT CRISIS, The Dems even less
Now WHO created the false premise that ANYONE said that regulations aren't factored? HMM
Dad2three
Gold Member
What do you think 'free trade' is? Oh right REMOVING BARRIERS so the 'job creators' can shift jobs off shore!
Dad2three
Gold Member
You're right, companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions.
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs
By BRUCE BARTLETT
The table below presents the bureauÂ’s data. As one can see, the number of layoffs nationwide caused by government regulation is minuscule and shows no evidence of getting worse during the Obama administration. Lack of demand for business products and services is vastly more important.
The Wall Street Journal’s July survey of business economists found, “The main reason U.S. companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand, rather than uncertainty over government policies, according to a majority of economists.”
In August, McClatchy Newspapers canvassed small businesses, asking them if regulation was a big problem. It could find no evidence that this was the case.
“None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it,” McClatchy reported. “Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-9 and its grim aftermath.”
The latest monthly survey of its members by the National Federation of Independent Business shows that poor sales are far and away their biggest problem. While concerns about regulation have risen during the Obama administration, they are about the same now as they were during Ronald ReaganÂ’s administration, according to an analysis of the federationÂ’s data by the Economic Policy Institute.
Academic research has also failed to find evidence that regulation is a significant factor in unemployment. In a blog post on Sept. 5, Jay Livingston, a sociologist at Montclair State University, hypothesized that if regulation were a major problem it would show up in the unemployment rates of industries where regulation has been increasing: the financial sector, medical care and mining/fuel extraction. He found that unemployment rates in these sectors were actually well below the national average.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/
lol
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
The Dems, Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the crisis?
Well that's a relief.
Thanks for the article. Was that supposed to prove that companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions?
No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)
1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom: The first thing to point out is that the both the subprime mortgage boom and the subsequent crash are very much concentrated in the private market, especially the private label securitization channel (PLS) market.
2. The governmentÂ’s affordability mission didnÂ’t cause the crisis
4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now
Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture
It is clear to anyone who has studied the financial crisis of 2008 that the private sectorÂ’s drive for short-term profit was behind it
Lest We Forget: Why We Had A Financial Crisis - Forbes
So was there more regulation or less regulation as a result of NAFTA? You're not answering, just deflecting like the ***** you are.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs
By BRUCE BARTLETT
The table below presents the bureauÂ’s data. As one can see, the number of layoffs nationwide caused by government regulation is minuscule and shows no evidence of getting worse during the Obama administration. Lack of demand for business products and services is vastly more important.
The Wall Street Journal’s July survey of business economists found, “The main reason U.S. companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand, rather than uncertainty over government policies, according to a majority of economists.”
In August, McClatchy Newspapers canvassed small businesses, asking them if regulation was a big problem. It could find no evidence that this was the case.
“None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it,” McClatchy reported. “Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-9 and its grim aftermath.”
The latest monthly survey of its members by the National Federation of Independent Business shows that poor sales are far and away their biggest problem. While concerns about regulation have risen during the Obama administration, they are about the same now as they were during Ronald ReaganÂ’s administration, according to an analysis of the federationÂ’s data by the Economic Policy Institute.
Academic research has also failed to find evidence that regulation is a significant factor in unemployment. In a blog post on Sept. 5, Jay Livingston, a sociologist at Montclair State University, hypothesized that if regulation were a major problem it would show up in the unemployment rates of industries where regulation has been increasing: the financial sector, medical care and mining/fuel extraction. He found that unemployment rates in these sectors were actually well below the national average.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/
lol
So NOTHING on your false premise of the Dems/F/F got it
The Dems, Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the crisis?
Well that's a relief.
Thanks for the article. Was that supposed to prove that companies never consider regulatory burden when making business decisions?
No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)
1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom: The first thing to point out is that the both the subprime mortgage boom and the subsequent crash are very much concentrated in the private market, especially the private label securitization channel (PLS) market.
2. The governmentÂ’s affordability mission didnÂ’t cause the crisis
4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now
Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture
It is clear to anyone who has studied the financial crisis of 2008 that the private sectorÂ’s drive for short-term profit was behind it
Lest We Forget: Why We Had A Financial Crisis - Forbes
No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown
I wonder where I claimed they did?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
You bought $11,000 in stock a few years ago.
You sold it for $15,000 last year.
You paid $600 on your $4,000 gain.
That doesn't make your effective rate 4%.
Dad2three
Gold Member
Dad2three
Gold Member
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
-
-
-
Please comment on new “ Project Hell Marry trailer ?? Getting great reviews- Started by Quasar44
- Replies: 0
-
Jasmine Crockett’s Security Guard Fatally Shot By Dallas SWAT In Standoff – What We Know- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 3
Latest Discussions
-
They tried making an excuse for why Baron can't serve... But none exist- Latest: Dorian Mode
-
-
Do you support a 1% Federal Wealth Tax to pay down the $39T National Debt? (Poll)- Latest: Captain Caveman
-
