What do liberals want the US to be?

[Steinlight]

Both parties support mass immigration, to give an idea, about 1 million legal immigrants alone entered the country in 2012 and this has been the consistent average since 1989.
Annual Immigration 2012
Does the United States Admit a Reasonable Number of Legal Immigrants NumbersUSA

No party has called for cutting mass immigration, in fact, both parties have supported increases in h1b visas. Obama wants to double the H1B Cap, and the GOP has called for similar measures
Obama apos s immigration tweaks leave Big Tech wanting more - Chicago Tribune
Republicans and business push to expand guest worker programs
Schumer and Hatch have come together in a "bipartisan bill" to increase H1b visas. As you can see both parties are screwing the American worker.
Schumer and Hatch strike breakthrough deal on H-1B visas TheHill

 

[Nosmo King]

I would replace the world liberal with progressive statist. Today's liberals are not liberals in the classical sense.

Progressive statists want a supreme federal government, where people are totally dependent on the state, and thus the state is an inseparable part of their lives. On the social front, they want everyone to either agree with them, or be ostracized and eliminated from society, or at least to just shut up in public.

No liberal wants a country where everyone is totally dependent on the state

Stop making shit up

progressive statists sure as hell do, and they are part of the modern "liberal" pantheon.

More bullshit on your part. You make up a position for liberals and then attack your phony position

The state has a role in any society. Most functions in our lives are best filled at the individual level but many are more efficiently performed by the state

So tramping over people's rights is a matter of efficiency?

Seig Heil, herr gruppenfuhrer.

Which of your rights have been trampled? Are you free to earn a living? Are you free to obtain property? Are you free to express your grievences?

How are you being repressed?

 

[Dad2three]

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated


Total U.S. taxes are barely progressive, as shown in this table and chart from Citizens for Tax Justice. The bottom 99 percent pays a 27.5 percent total tax rate on average, while the top 1 percent pays an average 29 percent tax rate, according to 2011 data from Citizens for Tax Justice.

Poor Americans Pay Double The State Local Tax Rates Of Top One Percent

I know the pain intimately ... my real estate holdings (I'm a developer) took a hit in 2006/2007 (about $2mil) from which I will never recover. Nevertheless I am not willing to kill the goose which laid the golden egg - something you seem eager to do - just to assuage my pain.

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Oh gawd, NOT this crap AGAIN

Listen, I gave you a link to my posts that tear apart your right wing BULLSHIT. It's here

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


BUT:

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”



Q Did the Community Reinvestment Act under Carter/Clinton caused it?


A "Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/20081203_analysis.pdf

AND YOU HEAVE PETER WALLISON ON ME? LOL

Listen Bubba, you can 'believe' all the bullshit you want, stop trying to shove it here

Wallison, part of Ed Pinto and Peter Wallison duo from AEI, spreading manure to right wingers for years...


1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom

2. The government’s affordability mission didn’t cause the crisis

3. There is a lot of research to back this up and little against it: This is not exactly an obscure corner of the wonk world — it is one of the most studied capital markets in the world.


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 .... They argued that the CRA and the GSEs were getting in the way of getting risky subprime mortgages to risky subprime borrowers.

MY FAV:


Peter Wallison in 2004: “In recent years, study after study has shown that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are failing to do even as much as banks and S&Ls in providing financing for affordable housing, including minority and low income housing.”

Hey Mayor Bloomberg No the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown but thats just according to the data The Big Picture




Conservatives Can’t Escape Blame for the Financial Crisis

The onset of the recent financial crisis in late 2007 created an intellectual crisis for conservatives, who had been touting for decades the benefits of a hands-off approach to financial market regulation. As the crisis quickly spiraled out of control, it quickly became apparent that the massive credit bubble of the mid-2000s, followed by the inevitable bust that culminated with the financial markets freeze in the fall of 2008, occurred predominantly among those parts of the financial system that were least regulated, or where regulations existed but were largely unenforced.

Predictably, many conservatives sought to blame the bogeymen they always blamed

Politics Most Blatant Center for American Progress


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up

G/S 'REPEAL, ONCE AGAIN, ZERO TO DO WITH DUBYA CHEERING ON REGULATORS AND BANKSTER RACE TO THE BOTTOM!!!




Mittens got TWICE as much as Obama, BTW

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I would replace the world liberal with progressive statist. Today's liberals are not liberals in the classical sense.

Progressive statists want a supreme federal government, where people are totally dependent on the state, and thus the state is an inseparable part of their lives. On the social front, they want everyone to either agree with them, or be ostracized and eliminated from society, or at least to just shut up in public.

No liberal wants a country where everyone is totally dependent on the state

Stop making shit up

progressive statists sure as hell do, and they are part of the modern "liberal" pantheon.

More bullshit on your part. You make up a position for liberals and then attack your phony position

The state has a role in any society. Most functions in our lives are best filled at the individual level but many are more efficiently performed by the state

So tramping over people's rights is a matter of efficiency?

Seig Heil, herr gruppenfuhrer.

Which of your rights have been trampled? Are you free to earn a living? Are you free to obtain property? Are you free to express your grievences?

How are you being repressed?

How about the right to the unfettered use of the product of one's labor?

The Right to Openly Market one's services to the public and to provide one's services without need of outside sanction?

The Right to hunt and fish without the burden of outside sanction?

Work through those and I'll get you some more... .

 

[Steinlight]

You can keep repeating the same thing that I discredited in the prior post. This isn't an argument.

Come up with some original material.

 

[Dad2three]

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated


Total U.S. taxes are barely progressive, as shown in this table and chart from Citizens for Tax Justice. The bottom 99 percent pays a 27.5 percent total tax rate on average, while the top 1 percent pays an average 29 percent tax rate, according to 2011 data from Citizens for Tax Justice.

Poor Americans Pay Double The State Local Tax Rates Of Top One Percent

I know the pain intimately ... my real estate holdings (I'm a developer) took a hit in 2006/2007 (about $2mil) from which I will never recover. Nevertheless I am not willing to kill the goose which laid the golden egg - something you seem eager to do - just to assuage my pain.

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

 

[Steinlight]

I know the pain intimately ... my real estate holdings (I'm a developer) took a hit in 2006/2007 (about $2mil) from which I will never recover. Nevertheless I am not willing to kill the goose which laid the golden egg - something you seem eager to do - just to assuage my pain.

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Well, I am glad the guy from the Ayn Rand Center can tell us with certainty that bank deregulation played no role in the financial crisis. No bias or conflict of interest in promoting reckless pirate capitalism there?

 

[Dad2three]

I'm not the one advocating a return to the tax structure of JFK. It is conservatives holding him up as one of their own

JFK was a Libturd shitass in many ways and a terrible President but he got one thing right. He understood that the economy does better when the people get to keep more of the money they make rather than giving it to the corrupt and incompetent government.

Do you want me to repost his quote to the American people on that?

As the rich get richer and store more of their loot off shore and out of the nation's economy


The truly rich don't spend the extra money, they send it to their money managers who invest it. It is a true GOP canard to say they 'create job'. The middle class are the job creators.

They "invest it?" We can't have that! Investment is so horrible for the economy!

If they spent it all, turds like you would be accusing them of living like oriental potentates and using that as a reason to loot them.

Conservative economic theories have never worked and never will. You can say "tax cuts create jobs" but that's just blather. Show me when it has worked and then we'll talk.

Look at the Reagan presidency when he said giving tax breaks to the rich and big business would spur growth. He was dead wrong, trickle down economics did not work, and he ended up promoting tax hikes. If anyone is not paying their fair share in this ecomomy it is the rich

 

[Dad2three]

ANOTHER lie. Shocking. WHEN and how did Dems 'raid' SS to pay for Dubya's war of choice which 60% of Dems in Congress voted against? Raid Medicare? lol

Obamacare 'raids' Medicare? Not exactly

The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act slows the growth in Medicare spending in several ways, including smaller automatic increases in payment rates for treatment providers and lower subsidies for private insurers. These two changes account for the largest savings -- $571 billion over 10 years, by the Congressional Budget Office's estimate. Both of them operate on the theory that the recipients of Medicare dollars can and should deliver better value of the money.

Obamacare raids Medicare Not exactly - Los Angeles Times

To be clear, 58% of Democratic Senators voted for it, and 39% of Democrats in the House. Kerry voted for the resolution, Obama voted for its continued funding, and the current front runner Hilary Clinton supported the resolution. I don't deny the grasroots democrats opposed Iraq(though they were curiously silent on intervention in Yugoslavia, Somalia, Libya, Syria etc), but the leadership is hawkish and pro-intervention.

So, it isn't a "lol" matter. The fact that you overlook it just shows your narrow minded attitude and partisanship.

And now you are just playing word games with Obamacare. The bill takes money that was to go towards automatic increases in Medicare spending and put it towards Obamacare. That is raiding Medicare. They are redirecting future medicare spending. You just don't mind what they are redirecting towards.

BZZZ a FUKKKKKING LIE. Shocking

Iraq Resolution

United States House of Representatives

82 (39.2%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution.

• 126 (~60.3%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.

The only Independent Representative voted against the resolution: Rep. Sanders (I-VT)

United States Senate

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution.
42% of Democratic senators (21 of 50) voted against the resolution.


AGAIN, 60% OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTED AGAINST DUBYA'S WARE OF CHOICE. You said Dems, not leadership


And YOU are being dishonest on Obamacares, the future payments aren't guaranteed AND the GOP used the same formula and TOOK the money out of Medicare and used it in Ryans budget which 100% of GOPers voted yes for in the House, BUT PUT THE MONEY TOWARDS TAX CUTS, LOL!

Your "evidence" just confirmed what I said, 58% of Democrats in the Senate voted for the Iraq War Resolution, and 39% of House Democrats.

I don't understand what you are ranting about here. Using caps makes you look crazy as well.

And your next point makes no sense. You support Obamacare cutting future Medicare payments because the GOP House Plan does as well? Again, what's your point?

Weird, MY posit was 60% of Dems VOTED AGAINST Dubya's war of choice, you came back with Dem 'leaders' voting for it? lol

Got it, On Obamacares you refuse to accept REALITY that the 'cut' to Medicare is actually just slowing down the rate of GROWTH of payment to Docs and hospitals and the same money that was 'cut' by Dems was ALSO cut by the GOP House version of their Ryan budget....

You are just repeating discredited points, even your link showed my point, that 58% of the Democrats in the Senate supported the war, and 39% of Democrats in the House, and the party leaders(including Kerry and Clinton), supported it as well. So I don't know what you are harping out about.

The fact is, you don't oppose the Iraq War, you just support carrying water for the pro-war Democrat Party. You have no honor or priniciple.

I get it, you support Obamacare cutting future medicare spending because Paul Ryan's plan did so to. You don't have to keep repeating yourself.

Got it, you are a moron who can't be honest

 

[Dad2three]

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Well, I am glad the guy from the Ayn Rand Center can tell us with certainty that bank deregulation played no role in the financial crisis. No bias or conflict of interest in promoting reckless pirate capitalism there?

Got it, YOU can't refuter THEIR facts that CLEARLY point out that what happened WASN'T do to not enough regulation, BUT REGULATORS ON THE BEAT WAS THE PROBLEM. Dubya (like Reagan did with Mr Grays warning in 1984 with the S&L crisis) ignored regulator warnings as he cheered on the subprime bubble because he had ZERO growth without it!




all outlined here

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Number of subprime mortgages made in 2005-2006 projected to end in foreclosure:

1 in 5



Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%



Subprime share of all home loans outstanding:
14%


Subprime share of foreclosure filings in the 12 months ending June 30, 2007: 64%

 

[Dad2three]

Stop projecting

ANY policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on in the US? LOL

Can you clarify your question?

ANY policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on in the US?

pol·i·cy1
ˈpäləsē/
noun
noun: policy; plural noun: policies
a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual.

How do you define correct? Do you mean your side? Do you mean the progressive side? The winning side, electorally speaking?

That is a rather loaded question that could be interpreted several ways.

What's interesting is the use of such language. The "right side" of history. The Marxists used this language as well. Didn't turn out so well for them. But I also think this represents a false conception of history. The Left views history as linear, constantly "moving forward". Whereas history shows history is cyclical, civilizations rise and fall.

So NO, you CAN'T give me ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on

They were the Torries standing with King George, Confederates, Isolationists during both WW's, fought labor laws, union rights, civil rights, min wage, etc...

Your characterization of what "conservative policy" is inaccurate. A left wing caricature more than anything else.

But lets take it issue by issue. My biggest objection out of the one's you mentioned is that WW1 is correct.

Why should we have gotten involved in the first place?

How did this war serve American interests?

I think non-interventionist conservatives and anti-war socialists alike who opposed the war were on the right side, and their position was vindicated by the bloody and disastrous result of WW1.

So NO you can't point to ONE policy..


The US made the right call by entering WWI. After the Lusitania was sunk, and thousands of American lives were lost, America had no other choice. Then the Germans sent the Zimmer telegram which told Mexico to attack the US. If Germany would of won WWI, and America wouldn't of entered the war, then what would of stopped Germany from invading America?

 

[Dad2three]

Take an economics course Bubba. It's called a multiplier effect! Or we just keep giving it to the top 1/10th of 1% of US who hold it offshore out of circulation?

The so-called "multiplier effect" is keynesian Voo Doo. It's obvious horseshit. Politicians love it because it allows them to delude themselves and the public that they are doing something beneficial when they spend us into bankruptcy. It's like getting an award for peeing in the punch bowl.

Got it, you don't like the field of economics, you prefer to live in myths and fairy tales of libertarian bullshit!

The multiplier effect is a myth. Keynesianism isn't economics. It's a con.

I think you are thinking 'supply side' Bubba

I'm no believer in the "supply side" mantra. However, Keynesianism is pure Voo Doo. Legitimate economists have known this since Keynes published his various assaults on logic and facts.

Sure, that's why the majority of the world uses it. Maybe you are thinking Austrian?

 

[Dad2three]

False premises, distortions and lies from the newest right winger. Shocking. You keep saying stuff about Dem leaders who are just Corp stooges, why should I care about them?


Your premise on immigration isn't worth a reply. PERIOD

Clinton? NAFTA? Oh no Bubba, that was Heritage Foundations baby, Ronnie Reagan announced it the day he announced his run for Prez in 1979


Buchanan ? lol. I guess you must be a Bircher too. Shock

What false premises, distortions and lies did I make? List them specifically.

You should care because the point is both parties are inherently corrupt and aren't different at the top. Unless it doesn't bother you and you just like voting for Team D. Some people like politics as a sport, where they vote for their "team". I guess you are one of those people.

Is it not worth a reply because you don't have one. If your position is so right, and I am so off, you should be able to easily explain the benefits of mass immigration and diversity. Come on, enlighten me.

So the Heritage Foundation and Clinton made Clinton sign this bill? How did they do that? This should be an interesting answer.

No, I am not a "bircher". Does standing up for American workers and national sovereignty make one a "bircher" now?

Which false premises, distortionbs or lies? Well Bubba we will start with this post, YOUR posit thatI am in favor or EVER advocated "mass immigration and diversity. "

Weird, you are the typical right winger with better writing but ZERO honesty. Shocking,.

If you support Pat Buchanan, you're a Bircher. Want nothing to do with you or your type, gawwwdman Teap party which is Bircher lite is bad enough!!!

I never said you were, I said the Democrat Party was.

So you oppose mass immigration and diversity? Is this your position?

Weird, you complain about ME pigeon holing you as a Rushblo, but you pigeon hole the "Democrat Party" (yeah, NOT the Democratic party) as in favor of "mass immigration"

PLEASE link to them (WHOEVER THE DEMOCRAT PARTY IS) or their policies proving that? lol


You wing nutters are just crazy. Knowing you can't deport 11-14+ million people, recognizing the problem is and ALWAYS has been EMPLOYERS, you want to blame people who are trying to survive or the mythical 'Democrat party'???

I didn't pigeon hole the Democrats, I stated the fact that both parties are in favor of mass immigration and amnesty. Are you hallucinating or something?




I support deportation and e-verify for employers and fines for those who don't comply. It isn't an either or situation. You won't have to physically deport 14 million. Operation ******* for example was successful in deporting over a million illegal immigrants. Once the law would be put into effect. Many would self deport, just look at what happened in Arizona a couple years ago for example after Brewer signed into law a couple years ago.
Co-author of Arizona immigration law says self-deportation working TheHill

Weird how you simply ignore shit thatr was debunked, like Clinton's NAFTA when it was Ronnie's, lol

Sure, that will work *shaking head*

Still waiting on ONE policy you Klowns were EVER correct about?

And I think the Arizona fool is the biggest piece of shit out there!

 

[Wyatt earp]

Damn the bullshit is getting deep in this thread, you sure you not related to Gruber?

 

[Steinlight]

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Well, I am glad the guy from the Ayn Rand Center can tell us with certainty that bank deregulation played no role in the financial crisis. No bias or conflict of interest in promoting reckless pirate capitalism there?

One example of where this article is completely wrong is the case of AIG. If AIG hadn't been allowed to insure financial derivative products, using the triple A rating of AIG, thorugh ending Glass Steagall, it wouldn't have been in the position where our entire insurance system was at risk where we needed to bail it out to keep it afloat. With Glass Steagall, AIG would have been forced to set up a separate financial corporation that wouldn't have carried the triple A rating their insurance company had, and they wouldn't have been able to insure these products in mass, and these financial products wouldn't have been tied to their regular policies.
7 Reasons To Support Glass-Steagall a List of Those Who Do Too Big Has Failed

 

[Dad2three]

No liberal wants a country where everyone is totally dependent on the state

Stop making shit up

progressive statists sure as hell do, and they are part of the modern "liberal" pantheon.

More bullshit on your part. You make up a position for liberals and then attack your phony position

The state has a role in any society. Most functions in our lives are best filled at the individual level but many are more efficiently performed by the state

So tramping over people's rights is a matter of efficiency?

Seig Heil, herr gruppenfuhrer.

Which of your rights have been trampled? Are you free to earn a living? Are you free to obtain property? Are you free to express your grievences?

How are you being repressed?

How about the right to the unfettered use of the product of one's labor?

The Right to Openly Market one's services to the public and to provide one's services without need of outside sanction?

The Right to hunt and fish without the burden of outside sanction?

Work through those and I'll get you some more... .

Reintroducing: The American School of Economics

When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.

It consisted of these three core policies:

1. protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
2. government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
3. a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation
   
   Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.
   
   
   
   The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton, was to ensure that dearly won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce, was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.
   

American School of Economics

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Well, I am glad the guy from the Ayn Rand Center can tell us with certainty that bank deregulation played no role in the financial crisis. No bias or conflict of interest in promoting reckless pirate capitalism there?

KILL THE GOOSE? Oh you mean the Banksters who hosed US via the GOP in 1920's, 1980's (Ronnie ignored regulator warnings just like Dubya) and 2008?


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You should get better material, or perhaps grow a brain?

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Well, I am glad the guy from the Ayn Rand Center can tell us with certainty that bank deregulation played no role in the financial crisis. No bias or conflict of interest in promoting reckless pirate capitalism there?

They spout tis crap like it is even remotely debatable.

The simple fact is that Urban Renewal was from the onset, the perfect formula for economic catastrophe.

The only sound means to renew urban blight is to remove those who's behavior RESULTED IN THE BLIGHT...

It turns out that SUBSIDIZING THEM: IS A REALLY BAD IDEA!

 

[Dad2three]

You can keep repeating the same thing that I discredited in the prior post. This isn't an argument.

Come up with some original material.

Sure you did Bubba, and G/S was the reason for Dubya's subprime bubble and Peter Wallison wasn't a piece of shit who other members of the GOP FCIC THOUGHT WAS A LOON, AND THE MEMBERS QUESTIONED WHETHER THE SOURCE OF HIS INFO, ED PINTO, HADN'T BEEN PAID OFF, LOL. THAT WAS THE GOPERS!

 

[Steinlight]

The majority of Democrats and Republicans voted for the bailouts(minus conservative and democratic socialist opposition on the wings of the parties. And Glass Steagall was repealed by Clinton, which was responsible for allowing commercial banks to merge with investment banks and threaten the solvency of regular depositors accounts. To reduce every problem to blaming Bush or the Republicans is dishonest.

Got it, you have NO CLUE about Dubya's financial **** up or how it came about

Glass-Steagal? That GOP bill? Zero to do with Dubya's crash

If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”


As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse




"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’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.”

Your analysis is incorrect and narrow sighted. Absolutely lending standards contributed, and both parties supported reduced lending standards, The Comunity Reinvestment Act began in 1977 under Carter, and Both Clinton and Bush supported reduced lending standards to increase "minority home ownership" among other reasons. It isn't and either or thing. The artificially low interest rate policy of the Fed contributed as well, without cheap money, banks wouldn't have been able to give out subprime loans to begin with.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis The American Spectator

The fact is, with Glass Steagall, this housing crisis would have been mitigated to the housing sector and a couple commercial banks. But since commercial banks merged with investment banks and were allowed to gamble with commercial depositors money, once these phoney derivatives went belly up, a "liquidity crisis" occurred where commercial lending was on the verge of drastically drying up in 2008. It is interesting that you support erasing one of the decent progressive policies of FDR, so you can carry water for neo-liberal hacks(and by extension neo-conservative hacks in the GOP as well) like Obama and Clinton who support bank deregulation. The fact is, you are an idiot who doesn't understand economics, you only know how to blindly defend a corrupt political party.
Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis - US News

Of course Obama will defend bank deregulation, his major donors are Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. He is a lackey of finance capital.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors - Bloomberg

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists
Yaron Brook and Don Watkins , Contributor
We're members at the Ayn Rand Center, covering economics and liberty.


There is zero evidence this change unleashed the financial crisis. If you tally the institutions that ran into severe problems in 2008-09, the list includes Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, none of which would have come under Glass-Steagall’s restrictions. Even President Obama has recently acknowledged that “there is not evidence that having Glass-Steagall in place would somehow change the dynamic.”

As for the FDIC-insured commercial banks that ran into trouble, the record is also clear: what got them into trouble were not activities restricted by Glass-Steagall. Their problems arose from investments in residential mortgages and residential mortgage-backed securities—investments they had always been free to engage in.

Why The Glass-Steagall Myth Persists - Forbes

Well, I am glad the guy from the Ayn Rand Center can tell us with certainty that bank deregulation played no role in the financial crisis. No bias or conflict of interest in promoting reckless pirate capitalism there?

Got it, YOU can't refuter THEIR facts that CLEARLY point out that what happened WASN'T do to not enough regulation, BUT REGULATORS ON THE BEAT WAS THE PROBLEM. Dubya (like Reagan did with Mr Grays warning in 1984 with the S&L crisis) ignored regulator warnings as he cheered on the subprime bubble because he had ZERO growth without it!




all outlined here

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Number of subprime mortgages made in 2005-2006 projected to end in foreclosure:

1 in 5



Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%



Subprime share of all home loans outstanding:
14%


Subprime share of foreclosure filings in the 12 months ending June 30, 2007: 64%

No one is arguing Bush didn't lower lending standards. But you ignore Clinton did the same and helped contribute to the resulting crisis, and the lowering of standards began under Carter through the CRA. Also, the repeal of Glass Steagall and artificially low interest rates of the Federal Reserve played a role.

You are a partisan hack with no perspective.

 

[Dad2three]

Damn the bullshit is getting deep in this thread, you sure you not related to Gruber?

You must be a conservative who WANTS to live in a bubble. Got it