Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: The True Adonis on April 16, 2009, 02:26:23 AM
-
-
I dunno, ...I get the feeling someone should have hired ACORN to organize their tea parties. :D
At least they wouldn't have forgotten about the permits.
-
Please there were literally hundreds of thousands of people all over the place. In Manhattan alone there was over 10,000 people.
You greedy pigs are just upset that people are not going to down quitely while ZERO tries to bankrupt the country with his Peter Pan policies.
-
Please there were literally hundreds of thousands of people all over the place. In Manhattan alone there was over 10,000 people.
You greedy pigs are just upset that people are not going to down quitely while ZERO tries to bankrupt the country with his Peter Pan policies.
Uh, I think you are off by about 500 percent.
GOP hopes to build momentum behind 'tea parties'
By SHANNON MCCAFFREY – 3 hours ago
ATLANTA (AP) — Republicans have lost their grip on Congress and the White House, but they claim to have American anger over taxes and the economy on their side as tens of thousands turned out for anti-tax "tea parties" around the country.
Wednesday's rallies used the dreaded April 15 — the U.S. deadline to file income taxes — as a hook to vent about government spending and corporate bailouts in an homage to the Boston Tea Party.
The tea parties were promoted by FreedomWorks, a conservative nonprofit advocacy group based in Washington and led by former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, who is now a lobbyist.
Organizers said the movement developed organically through online social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter and through exposure on Fox News and promotion from conservative pundits and bloggers.
While FreedomWorks insisted the rallies were nonpartisan, they have been seized on by many prominent Republicans who view them as a promising way for the party to reclaim its momentum against President Barack Obama's administration and other Democrats.
"All you have to be is a mildly awake Republican candidate for office to get in front of that parade," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform.
Some Republicans considering 2012 presidential bids and others with upcoming campaigns for state and congressional offices hitched a ride with the movement.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich took the podium in front of New York's City Hall while the crowd of about 2,000 chanted, "We are America!"
He urged people to tell their lawmakers to vote against big spending or else "we're going to fire you."
As the former House speaker left after his 11-minute speech, passers-by yelled, "2012, Newt!" and "Run for president!" But when asked about a run, Gingrich shook his head emphatically and said, "I'm just part of a citizen movement."
Another possible candidate, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, sent an e-mail to his supporters, letting them know about tea parties throughout the state. South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford attended two tea parties.
"This is critically important, what you're doing," Kansas Republican Sen. Sam Brownback, a likely candidate for governor in 2010, told the crowd in Topeka. "You've got to keep it up."
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, facing re-election next year, told protesters in Austin that officials in Washington have abandoned the country's founding principles of limited government. He recently rejected $550 million in federal economic stimulus money slated to help Texas' unemployment trust fund.
While the political implications of the rallies remain to be seen as Obama's administration pursues its economic recovery plan, thousands of protesters turned out in loud and colorful ways to express their frustration with Obama and Washington in general.
Indianapolis small business owners Ben and Bree Finegan brought their two children to a local rally. Two-year-old Kate held a sign from her stroller reading, "In diapers & in debt."
The crowd in Carson City, Nev., included a 5-year-old boy holding a sign that read, "My share of the national debt is $36,500." Some wore cowboy hats with tea bags dangling from them.
In Boston, a few hundred protesters gathered on the Boston Common, a short distance from the original Tea Party in 1773. Some dressed in Revolutionary garb and carried signs that said "Barney Frank, Bernie Madoff: And the Difference Is?" and "D.C.: District of Communism."
In Atlanta, thousands of people gathered outside the Capitol, where Fox News Channel conservative pundit Sean Hannity broadcast his show Wednesday night. One protester's sign read: "Hey Obama you can keep the change."
Julie Reeves, of Covington, Ga., brought her Chihuahua, Arnie, who wore a tiny anti-IRS T-shirt. "I want the government to get its hand the hell out of my wallet," Reeves said.
Duncan Philp, of Carpenter, Wyo., carried a flag in Cheyenne reading "Don't Tread on Me" and dragged a United Nations flag on the ground. Philp said he's a member of the Wyoming Tyranny Response Team, a group dedicated to the Bill of Rights.
He said Congress ignored Americans' request not to bail out financially troubled banks.
"Bush and Obama have done the same thing," Philp said. "They've given out loans for money they don't have."
In Helena, Mont., protesters stomped on boxes labeled to represent various taxes, such as income and a proposal to tax carbon dioxide output.
"It's a stepping stone to one day being able to tax you for the very air that you breathe," said event organizer Jim Walker.
There were several small counter-protests, including one that drew about a dozen people at Fountain Square in Cincinnati. A counter-protester held a sign that read, "Where were you when Bush was spending billions a month 'liberating' Iraq?" The anti-tax demonstration there, meanwhile, drew about 4,000 people.
Some Democrats said the Tax Day rallies offered little substance.
"The Republicans are going to have to do more than their standard rhetoric about taxes in order to be successful. They need some new ideas," said Brian Schatz, chairman of the Hawaii Democratic Party. "It's a tired old line of attack."
Associated Press writers who contributed to this report include Beth Fouhy in New York; Kelsey Abbruzzese in Boston; Terry Kinney in Cincinnati; Seanna Adcox in Columbia, S.C.; Kelley Shannon in Austin, Texas; Virginia Byrne in New York; Herbert A. Sample in Honolulu; Cathy Bussewitz in Carson City, Nev.; and Matt Joyce in Cheyenne, Wyo.
-
How about some of these leftists criticise Obama for the EXACT same shit they used to criticise Bush for? As long as Obama does it, it is ok...
-
So lets see, New York City has around 8,274,527 people
2000 people show up in New York City to support the New York City Tea Party.
That is approximately 0.000241705659 Percent of the Population in New York City.
One Ten-Thousandths of one percent or in other words, not worthy of any note and completely irrelevant statistically speaking when put into context.
-
I live in NYC and on the radio this morning they said between 10,000 to 12,000 as per police estimates.
-
So lets see, New York City has around 8,274,527 people
2000 people show up in New York City to support the New York City Tea Party.
That is approximately 0.000241705659 Percent of the Population in New York City.
One Ten-Thousandths of one percent or in other words, not worthy of any note and completely irrelevant statistically speaking when put into context.
How about some of these leftists criticise Obama for the EXACT same shit they used to with Bush?
-
They wont, he is too big to fail and they too much invested emotionally to call him out on the fact that he is Bush on roids.
-
I live in NYC and on the radio this morning they said between 10,000 to 12,000 as per police estimates.
Even if it were 10,000- 12,000 which no news organization is reporting,
That would then mean,
0.00145023395 percent of the population turned out for The Teabagging of New York City.
Utter Failure.
-
Even if it were 10,000- 12,000 which no news organization is reporting,
That would then mean,
0.00145023395 percent of the population turned out for The Teabagging of New York City.
Utter Failure.
MILLION MAN MARCH DREW 500,000 PEOPLE from a population of 40,000,000.A total failure.Wow,you quote Rachel the bull dyke Maddow as the source.Very reliable new person there.
-
MILLION MAN MARCH DREW 500,000 PEOPLE from a population of 40,000,000.A total failure.Wow,you quote Rachel the bull dyke Maddow as the source.Very reliable new person there.
Even if there were a million there (and I think there were), by Adonis' bone-headed standards, that would be a "total failure".
Of course, the point is that ALL protests are a small percentage of the voting electorate.
-
The Million Man March was a failure. What did it accomplish?
-
The Million Man March was a failure. What did it accomplish?
God damn, you are nothing but a arrogant wikipedia posting fucktard. You wil be one of the last people to wake up.
-
Please there were literally hundreds of thousands of people all over the place.
LOL... no there were not.
You're just making up numbers, Dutch Boy!
-
LOL... no there were not.
You're just making up numbers, Dutch Boy!
Denver= more than 5000 people
protests in 800 cities
I think it was a couple of hundred thousend across the country.
More than 5,000 people crowded onto the west side of the state Capitol this afternoon, as part of a nationwide string of tax-day protests dubbed "tea parties."
(http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2009/0415/20090415__TAX-RALLY~p1.jpg)
-
Obama once came to Denver and over 100,000 people showed up in Denver alone. True Story.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2976562968_0bc409391f.jpg)
(http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/45527/original.jpg)
(http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/10/26/PH2008102601433.jpg)
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9jS378GfXKU/SQTeZv5kZwI/AAAAAAAAAQk/Q--4q9uM7KM/s400/Obama+Denver+100000.jpg)
-
Please there were literally hundreds of thousands of people all over the place. In Manhattan alone there was over 10,000 people.
You greedy pigs are just upset that people are not going to down quitely while ZERO tries to bankrupt the country with his Peter Pan policies.
AHHH no their wasnt... Fox news ALWAYS distorts the numbers... I remember in the Campaign when FOX said McCain had 20,000 people at his rally and the venue only held like 6000... And the local Police said it wasnt at capacity...
neil Kavudo got nailed LIEING about the numbers on TV last night and CAUGHT by a camera he didnt know was on...
-
Who doesnt want to hear how about much more free stuff you are going to get by your lord messiah????
-
Obama once came to Denver and over 100,000 people showed up in Denver alone. True Story.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2976562968_0bc409391f.jpg)
(http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/45527/original.jpg)
(http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/10/26/PH2008102601433.jpg)
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9jS378GfXKU/SQTeZv5kZwI/AAAAAAAAAQk/Q--4q9uM7KM/s400/Obama+Denver+100000.jpg)
The University of Michigan plays in front of 100,000 people everytime they play a home game.True story.Who cares?Again,its amazing,I never see any libs in the media or on the blogs EVER knock a left wing lib rally,ever.They fall all over themselves to try to portray it as a "game changing" event.If PETA has a rally and it drwas 30 people,you can bet MSNBC will have cameras there and the hosts will be drooling saying "this is sending a huge cry to Washington".
-
Who doesnt want to hear how about much more free stuff you are going to get by your lord messiah????
We would like to hear more about these phony numbers you made up and got pwned with.
-
Hard to confirm actual #s but several areas had crowds in the thousands...and if thats true about Cavuto, its unfortunate. Exaggerations aren't acceptible.
-
We would like to hear more about these phony numbers you made up and got pwned with.
Across the nation the number is easily a few hundred thousand.
-
Sorry... Every news outlet that I've read across the country has stated that the turn out was very low.
-
Sorry... Every news outlet that I've read across the country has stated that the turn out was very low.
Compared to what?
What did they expect millions and millions of people who are busy working taking the day off???
The only people usually who have time to do that dont work in the first place. Think Sharptons' usual rent-a-mob.
-
Compared to what?
What did they expect millions and millions of people who are busy working taking the day off???
The only people usually who have time to do that dont work in the first place. Think Sharptons' usual rent-a-mob.
If you're jobless, then you don't really have to pay taxes right?
So why are these jobless people who don't pay taxes complaining?
-
God damn, you are nothing but a arrogant wikipedia posting fucktard. You wil be one of the last people to wake up.
^hahahah this^
-
If you're jobless, then you don't really have to pay taxes right?
So why are these jobless people who don't pay taxes complaining?
Listen Dude. Please stop confusing the Republican whining with little facts. Facts do not penetrate their little fantasy bubble anyway.
-
Listen Dude. Please stop confusing the Republican whining with little facts. Facts do not penetrate their little fantasy bubble anyway.
It depends. If you declare a lot of exemptions and lose your job you still have to pay taxes on the income you received when you file.
Additionally, I believe UE is taxable, but I am not sure.
-
They still have to deal with property taxes, sales tax, tax on gas, food, cigarettes/alcohol and wherever else they bake in taxes that we don't know about. No doubt federal income tax is the biggest though.
-
Compared to what?
What did they expect millions and millions of people who are busy working taking the day off???
The only people usually who have time to do that dont work in the first place. Think Sharptons' usual rent-a-mob.
Hahaha! Yup. I think this is why democrat rallies always draw more than repub rallies. The repubs are all at work.
-
Hahaha! Yup. I think this is why democrat rallies always draw more than repub rallies. The repubs are all at work.
Except these guys who decided to show up yesterday... Apparently they don't even feel the need to look for jobs.
-
Obama once came to Denver and over 100,000 people showed up in Denver alone. True Story.
Everything has a beginning. Yes today over 5,000 showed up in Denver. Next year it may be 10,000, the year after that may be 100,000. You just took this one snap shot in time and judged the protest based on the amount of people at the event compared to another one and deemed it a failure.
This wasn't a competition to see who could get more people out of their homes. No one at the rally's thought they were going to change the world, they went to express their feelings publicly and in that way they were very successful.
protest: an expression or declaration of objection, disapproval, or dissent, often in opposition to something a person is powerless to prevent or avoid
-
Who cares how many people showed up? Their message was carried by every news program in the country. All the political/radio stations...newspapers, tv, the web. It even showed up on the polotics board of a fucking bodybuilding website. Mission accomplished.
I hate to compare this to marketing, but lets say you plan an event for a local retailer.....you expect large numbers of consumers to show up to this event but the actual turnout is low......however, for whatever reason, every major news outlet in the country picks up your story and that story then exposes your product (message in this case) to tens of millions of people. Total success. The objective of a protest is to gain attention to spark change. I would think these people got plenty of that from secondary coverage.
-
Who cares how many people showed up? Their message was carried by every news program in the country. All the political/radio stations...newspapers, tv, the web. It even showed up on the polotics board of a fucking bodybuilding website. Mission accomplished.
I hate to compare this to marketing, but lets say you plan an event for a local retailer.....you expect large numbers of consumers to show up to this event but the actual turnout is low......however, for whatever reason, every major news outlet in the country picks up your story and that story then exposes your product (message in this case) to tens of millions of people. Total success. The objective of a protest is to gain attention to spark change. I would think these people got plenty of that from secondary coverage.
It's always nice to know that the obvious doesn't go over everbody's head. True Anus is too involved in the details to look at the situation as a whole.
-
Very true body 88, great point. The message has gotten out and perhaps people will start listening more closely to the spending that is going on in this administration. Unfortunately, they waited 8 yrs too long!
-
Very true body 88, great point. The message has gotten out and perhaps people will start listening more closely to the spending that is going on in this administration. Unfortunately, they waited 8 yrs too long!
Exactly... You can't talk only about this administration... You have to mention how much Bush spent.
-
Exactly... You can't talk only about this administration... You have to mention how much Bush spent.
I have no problem with that. Bush was a fiscal drug addict and disaster.
-
I have no problem with that. Bush was a fiscal drug addict and disaster.
So the question is, why did none of these people come out before now?
They weren't tired of paying taxes all of these years? They weren't tired of the spending?
Where were they before Obama?
-
So the question is, why did none of these people come out before now?
They weren't tired of paying taxes all of these years? They weren't tired of the spending?
Where were they before Obama?
Because Obama has spent and proposed in less than 100 days what took Bush 8 years to do.
I guess its like the boiling frog analogy.
-
Because Obama has spent and proposed in less than 100 days what took Bush 8 years to do.
I guess its like the boiling frog analogy.
No... Obama is just being honest about what he believes is required, where Bush just wrote checks at will.
-
No... Obama is just being honest about what he believes is required, where Bush just wrote checks at will.
Even the CBO is against what he is proposing and saying it is based on numbers that simply dont add up.
-
Even the CBO is against what he is proposing and saying it is based on numbers that simply dont add up.
So you trust Congress now?
You didn't before... Sounds like it's just because they're disagreeing with Obama.
-
It's funny how everyone blames Bush for the financial disaster we're in..but if anyone bothers to do any fact checking they would know under the Clinton administration, there were policies enacted that basically forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history. These were the initial steps that led to the credit crisis. For some reason, the left seems to prioritize the rights of lowlifes, illegal aliens, terrorists and criminals over those of productive , successful U.S. citizens. Can someone explain to me why they would align themselves with a party that does that?
-
It's funny how everyone blames Bush for the financial disaster we're in..but if anyone bothers to do any fact checking they would know under the Clinton administration, there were policies enacted that basically forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history. These were the initial steps that led to the credit crisis. For some reason, the left seems to prioritize the rights of lowlifes, illegal aliens, terrorists and criminals over those of productive , successful U.S. citizens. Can someone explain to me why they would align themselves with a party that does that?
And therein lies the point of these tea parties. As I've said multiple times, while Obama certainly didn't start this fire, he's the one dumping gas on it.
He's making a bad situation even worse, spending more in 8 weeks than Bush did in 8 years . He's signing thousand-plus-page, multi-billion bills, loaded with swine, without even reading the darn things.
Not to mention, he's giving permission to bank execs to pay themselves million-dollar bonuses with bailout money; yet, he has the nerve to get steamed when they actually do it.
To quote another tea party sign, "I don't care who started the spending, I JUST WANT IT TO STOP!!!"
-
It's funny how everyone blames Bush for the financial disaster we're in..but if anyone bothers to do any fact checking they would know under the Clinton administration, there were policies enacted that basically forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history. These were the initial steps that led to the credit crisis. For some reason, the left seems to prioritize the rights of lowlifes, illegal aliens, terrorists and criminals over those of productive , successful U.S. citizens. Can someone explain to me why they would align themselves with a party that does that?
Ok, so under Reagan we started to accumulate the massive debt we have today.
Wanna blame Reagan too?
-
Ok, so under Reagan we started to accumulate the massive debt we have today.
Wanna blame Reagan too?
It's not the debt that caused the financial meltdown..it was the massive accumalation of bad loans that under leftist policies, were given to millions of uncreditworthy people. These loans, which never had a chance of repayment were packaged into investment vehicles, and imploded after the real estate bubble began to burst. All I'm saying is..it wasn't George Bush that forced the mortgage industry to loan money to losers.
-
It's not the debt that caused the financial meltdown..it was the massive accumalation of bad loans that under leftist policies, were given to millions of uncreditworthy people. These loans, which never had a chance of repayment were packaged into investment vehicles, and imploded after the real estate bubble began to burst. All I'm saying is..it wasn't George Bush that forced the mortgage industry to loan money to losers.
No, but he had a nice State of the Union that pressured the banks into do it more.
-
Ok, so under Reagan we started to accumulate the massive debt we have today.
Wanna blame Reagan too?
Go back to the 70's...
-
It's funny how everyone blames Bush for the financial disaster we're in..but if anyone bothers to do any fact checking they would know under the Clinton administration, there were policies enacted that basically forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history. These were the initial steps that led to the credit crisis. For some reason, the left seems to prioritize the rights of lowlifes, illegal aliens, terrorists and criminals over those of productive , successful U.S. citizens. Can someone explain to me why they would align themselves with a party that does that?
You know what's a hoot? It's when someone tries to pin the housing meltdown on the backs of poor-middle class people and gov. programs that might help them.
Sorry man, it just didn't happen the way you described it. Your summary is deadwrong.
It wasn't fucking poor people who caused this problem. Massive mortgage securitizationand exotic/subprime mortgages paved the way. Mortgage refinancing, deregulated lending and elimination of fraud oversight laws led to the housing debacle.
Collateralized Debt Obligations & Credit Default Swaps spread the virus to every mutual fund/REIT on earth.
All because there was not enough regulation and no enforcement of existing regulation to quell the hysterical greed.
Something for nothing. The same shit that happened with the S & L scandal under Bush I.
-
You know what's a hoot? It's when someone tries to pin the housing meltdown on the backs of poor-middle class people and gov. programs that might help them.
Sorry man, it just didn't happen the way you described it. Your summary is deadwrong.
It wasn't fucking poor people who caused this problem. Massive mortgage securitizationand exotic/subprime mortgages paved the way. Mortgage refinancing, deregulated lending and elimination of fraud oversight laws led to the housing debacle.
Collateralized Debt Obligations & Credit Default Swaps spread the virus to every mutual fund/REIT on earth.
All because there was not enough regulation and no enforcement of existing regulation to quell the hysterical greed.
Something for nothing. The same shit that happened with the S & L scandal under Bush I.
Most people agree that Clinton/Gramm pushing through tyhe end of the Glass Steagal act helped start this disaster. It was Wall Street and the Government working hand in hand that created this mess.
-
This is the same guy who dismisses the facts that FOX has the best ratings on cable television and Rush has 20,000,000 listeners.He says ratings arent the main way to rate success.However,because the tea parties didnt draw 100,000 people an event,its a failure.Very strange.
-
Most people agree that Clinton/Gramm pushing through tyhe end of the Glass Steagal act helped start this disaster. It was Wall Street and the Government working hand in hand that created this mess.
That's great. And what does that have to do with blaming the housing meltdown on the poor?
The repeal of GS was a republican effort passed along party lines and signed into law by a conservative president. What does that have to do with the poor being the cause of the worldwide economic breakdown?
-
That's great. And what does that have to do with blaming the housing meltdown on the poor?
The repeal of GS was a republican effort passed along party lines and signed into law by a conservative president. What does that have to do with the poor being the cause of the worldwide economic breakdown?
Whoever says that is wrong.
-
Whoever says that is wrong.
This guy's saying it:
The ChemistV2
Getbig IV
Posts: 1282
Re: TEABAGGING RECAP- Utter Failed Display of Ignorance and LOW Attendance-VIDEO :)
« Reply #43 on: April 19, 2009, 11:12:00 AM » Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's funny how everyone blames Bush for the financial disaster we're in..but if anyone bothers to do any fact checking they would know under the Clinton administration, there were policies enacted that basically forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history. These were the initial steps that led to the credit crisis. For some reason, the left seems to prioritize the rights of lowlifes, illegal aliens, terrorists and criminals over those of productive , successful U.S. citizens. Can someone explain to me why they would align themselves with a party that does that?
-
That's great. And what does that have to do with blaming the housing meltdown on the poor?
The repeal of GS was a republican effort passed along party lines and signed into law by a conservative president. What does that have to do with the poor being the cause of the worldwide economic breakdown?
What 333386 is saying, regarding the housing thing, is that they worked hand-in-hand.
Banks got greedy and stupid, giving loans to anyone with a pulse.
Lower-income people got greedy and stupid, buying houses WAAAAAAAAAAAY outside of their budgets.
I bought my house, during the height of the housing boom, in the 2nd-hottest housing market in the country. We got outbid for houses by tens of thousands of dollars, even when those houses didn't appraise for the value the owners wanted.
-
What 333386 is saying, regarding the housing thing, is that they worked hand-in-hand.
Banks got greedy and stupid, giving loans to anyone with a pulse.
Lower-income people got greedy and stupid, buying houses WAAAAAAAAAAAY outside of their budgets.
I bought my house, during the height of the housing boom, in the 2nd-hottest housing market in the country. We got outbid for houses by tens of thousands of dollars, even when those houses didn't appraise for the value the owners wanted.
I'm not disagreeing with him.
-
I'm not disagreeing with him.
The bottom line is that these banks gave these people credit KNOWING & HOPING they would default because they assumed that they would be getting an appreciating asset still going up in value and/or have these people paying insane interest rates wo ever paying the principal down.
The government, through Fanny and Freddy aided and abbetted this chaos by buying these mortgages and re-selling them and prompted banks to give out loans to people who were not credit worthy.
Both gambled and lost and is the reason I say no bailouts to Wall Street.
They knew better. The little greedy people did not know better when they should have.
-
The bottom line is that these banks gave these people credit KNOWING & HOPING they would default because they assumed that they would be getting an appreciating asset still going up in value and/or have these people paying insane interest rates wo ever paying the principal down.
The government, through Fanny and Freddy aided and abbetted this chaos by buying these mortgages and re-selling them and prompted banks to give out loans to people who were not credit worthy.
Both gambled and lost and is the reason I say no bailouts to Wall Street.
They knew better. The little greedy people did not know better when they should have.
That would be textbook fraud.
These people were never charged b/c the oversight laws were not enforced.
Regulations just get in the way apparently.
There should be bailouts (the economy needs the bail out $$) and criminal investigations to recoup the money and jail the guilty.
-
That would be textbook fraud.
These people were never charged b/c the oversight laws were not enforced.
Regulations just get in the way apparently.
There should be bailouts (the economy needs the bail out $$) and criminal investigations to recoup the money and jail the guilty.
Of course it was fraud. However, because a gun, knife, blood is not involved, people dont take it serious enough. Mortgage brokers committed massive fraud, got paid up front, and left a lot of banks with fraudulent loans.
-
Of course it was fraud. However, because a gun, knife, blood is not involved, people dont take it serious enough. Mortgage brokers committed massive fraud, got paid up front, and left a lot of banks with fraudulent loans.
There is always a paper trail and a way to get these bastards. Steal $50 sticking up a gas station and you're put away for 5-7 years.
Steal 5 million....and you buy that dream house in Costa Rica.
-
That's great. And what does that have to do with blaming the housing meltdown on the poor?
The repeal of GS was a republican effort passed along party lines and signed into law by a conservative president. What does that have to do with the poor being the cause of the worldwide economic breakdown?
I never said it was the fault of the poor, I was referring to legislation passed during the Clinton administration that forced mortgage companies to lower their lending standards under the concept that home ownership should be made more "equitable". We're talking about goverment policy, not poor people. If you do some research, you'll see this is true.
-
There is always a paper trail and a way to get these bastards. Steal $50 sticking up a gas station and you're put away for 5-7 years.
Steal 5 million....and you buy that dream house in Costa Rica.
Sometimes I think you paint me with the wrong brush, I think these bankers and wall steeeters need to be put on a firing squad.
They will do anything to keep their wasteful lifestyles, far worse than shooting their own mothers. Tanking the entire country is more like it.
-
Sometimes I think you paint me with the wrong brush, I think these bankers and wall steeeters need to be put on a firing squad.
They will do anything to keep their wasteful lifestyles, far worse than shooting their own mothers. Tanking the entire country is more like it.
I agree totally. Although the govt enacted the "lending to losers" legislation, the Wall Streeters came up with the idea of packaging these worthless loans into investments....only caring about their immediate profit and not the inevitable consequences.
-
This is the same guy who dismisses the facts that FOX has the best ratings on cable television and Rush has 20,000,000 listeners.He says ratings arent the main way to rate success.However,because the tea parties didnt draw 100,000 people an event,its a failure.Very strange.
Fox is in more homes than other networks there my friend...
-
I never said it was the fault of the poor, I was referring to legislation passed during the Clinton administration that forced mortgage companies to lower their lending standards under the concept that home ownership should be made more "equitable". We're talking about goverment policy, not poor people. If you do some research, you'll see this is true.
Loans to poor people did not cause the housing meltdown. Which Clinton laws did what?
What law(s) "forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history"?
-
Loans to poor people did not cause the housing meltdown. Which Clinton laws did what?
What law(s) "forced banks and mortgage companies to make loans to people with terrible credit, terrible income history"?
It's called the Community Re-investment Act enacted under Clinton in 1997. Here's some info:
A prime example of a public program gone awry—and one of the key causes of the current credit crisis—is the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). CRA was designed to ensure that all homeowners were treated “equally” by avoiding “redlining,” the deliberate shifting of financing away from low-income or high-risk areas. While CRA was designed to serve a positive goal, the economic implications of the new regulation were far more complicated. CRA required mortgage lenders to provide loans to riskier clients, often in stark contrast to what market forces may have dictated. This was done by incentivizing mortgage lenders to make loans for homes in certain zip codes and also by penalizing perceived failures to do enough.
These new loans spawned the subprime mortgage market, a financial sector that is now embroiled in controversy, whose collapse triggered the current downward economic trend. CRA is in many ways socialized financing, forcing banks to lend counter to market trends, thus increasing the risk of failure. We are now caught in a financial downturn that has emerged as a direct result of these risky loans. Any expansion of CRA that limits market flexibility and unnecessarily increases risk is not good policy: A financial collapse benefits no one.
-
It's called the Community Re-investment Act enacted under Clinton in 1997. Here's some info:
A prime example of a public program gone awry—and one of the key causes of the current credit crisis—is the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). CRA was designed to ensure that all homeowners were treated “equally” by avoiding “redlining,” the deliberate shifting of financing away from low-income or high-risk areas. While CRA was designed to serve a positive goal, the economic implications of the new regulation were far more complicated. CRA required mortgage lenders to provide loans to riskier clients, often in stark contrast to what market forces may have dictated. This was done by incentivizing mortgage lenders to make loans for homes in certain zip codes and also by penalizing perceived failures to do enough.
These new loans spawned the subprime mortgage market, a financial sector that is now embroiled in controversy, whose collapse triggered the current downward economic trend. CRA is in many ways socialized financing, forcing banks to lend counter to market trends, thus increasing the risk of failure. We are now caught in a financial downturn that has emerged as a direct result of these risky loans. Any expansion of CRA that limits market flexibility and unnecessarily increases risk is not good policy: A financial collapse benefits no one.
"Only 6% of all higher priced loans were covered by the CRA"
Federal Reserve: “Community Reinvestment Act – Not the Cause of the Housing Crisis”
WASHINGTON, D.C. – US Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) welcomed the unequivocal conclusion of Federal Reserve officials that the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was not responsible for the on-going housing crisis.
“CRA has helped ensure that families and small businesses in lower income and minority communities are not starved of vital loans and investments,” Ellison said. “There are those who continue to make ideologically-driven claims that CRA is the cause of our current woes. The Fed’s research demonstrates without a doubt that those allegations simply don’t hold any water,” Ellison stated.
http://www.insightnews.com/index.php?id=4178:federal-reserve-community-reinvestment-act-not-the-cause-of-the-housing-crisis&option=com_content&catid=10:news&Itemid=6
Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis
Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.
...
Better targets for blame in government circles might be the 2000 law which ensured that credit default swaps would remain unregulated, the SEC’s puzzling 2004 decision to allow the largest brokerage firms to borrow upwards of 30 times their capital and that same agency’s failure to oversee those brokerage firms in subsequent years as many gorged on subprime debt.
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html
Like I said, the poor were not the cause for the housing meltdown. The CRA is not to blame either.
Bush (and his appointees & colleagues) is largely to blame.
-
The cause of the crisis was greedy disgusting banksters creating these loans and selling them to other banks as "packaged securities" to other banks knowing they were trash to begin with. Because the originiating bank did not have to sit with the loan that it knew would go into default they could care less whether the bank buying the loan got fucked since they were not going to suffer any negative consequences.
The govt gave cover to the banks with the CRA and Fanny and Freddy buying up some many of these loans which never should have been created in the first place.
-
"Only 6% of all higher priced loans were covered by the CRA"
Federal Reserve: “Community Reinvestment Act – Not the Cause of the Housing Crisis”
WASHINGTON, D.C. – US Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) welcomed the unequivocal conclusion of Federal Reserve officials that the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was not responsible for the on-going housing crisis.
“CRA has helped ensure that families and small businesses in lower income and minority communities are not starved of vital loans and investments,” Ellison said. “There are those who continue to make ideologically-driven claims that CRA is the cause of our current woes. The Fed’s research demonstrates without a doubt that those allegations simply don’t hold any water,” Ellison stated.
http://www.insightnews.com/index.php?id=4178:federal-reserve-community-reinvestment-act-not-the-cause-of-the-housing-crisis&option=com_content&catid=10:news&Itemid=6
Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis
Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.
...
Better targets for blame in government circles might be the 2000 law which ensured that credit default swaps would remain unregulated, the SEC’s puzzling 2004 decision to allow the largest brokerage firms to borrow upwards of 30 times their capital and that same agency’s failure to oversee those brokerage firms in subsequent years as many gorged on subprime debt.
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html
Like I said, the poor were not the cause for the housing meltdown. The CRA is not to blame either.
Bush (and his appointees & colleagues) is largely to blame.
Obviously the democrat who wrote that has his version. I could reprint 50 articles from informed people that say the opposite. The truth is the government pressured the banks and mortgage companies to lower lending standards. What 333386 says is also true. More than one villain here.
-
Obviously the democrat who wrote that has his version. I could reprint 50 articles from informed people that say the opposite. The truth is the government pressured the banks and mortgage companies to lower lending standards. What 333386 says is also true. More than one villain here.
redlining has a history in property case law. It was real.
The CRA has been around since 1977. Are you trying to tell me that it took 30+ years for the nefarious effects to manifest?
Or are you claiming that the 1999 changes wrought by Phil Gramm are responsible?
Or is it the 2005 deregulatory efforts?
If you have any empirical evidence that supports your claim, feel free to pony it up. Otherwise you're just making unsupported statements that jibe with rightwing talking points.
-
redlining has a history in property case law. It was real.
The CRA has been around since 1977. Are you trying to tell me that it took 30+ years for the nefarious effects to manifest?
Or are you claiming that the 1999 changes wrought by Phil Gramm are responsible?
Or is it the 2005 deregulatory efforts?
If you have any empirical evidence that supports your claim, feel free to pony it up. Otherwise you're just making unsupported statements that jibe with rightwing talking points.
people are also not realizing the fact that the 500k cap gains exemption fostered a ton of flipping as well.