Today's not so funny, laugh!!

[Clayton_Wetter]

You just did me one better MotorMouth. Thanks for bringing the past to better focus than what I just posted.

[anthonycacace]

A few thoughts.

Woodrow Wilson created the banking crisis? How? Are you referring to the 16th Constitutional Amendment or the 19th? His attempt to remove child labor from factories? Help me understand your logic here.

Let's not forget that a system of government (representative democracy) is not the same thing as an economic system (capitalism vs. socialism). Is Milton Friedman the only economic theory that you think works? Seems to me that Keynesian theory built America into the economic powerhouse we have had over the years. Also, how could corporations be what they are today without a history of govt. subsiding: rail, roads, electrification, education, retirement, etc.

Net neutrality: I guess govt could control the net under this, but the underpinnings have more to do with disallowing corporations the ability to block of slow down material they think you should not see or to chose what they want you to see. Also, this goes further back in history than the current admin, but I understand that does not fit y'alls "Marxist" narrative.

[LITE-INN]

I don't think you guys are going back far enough in history to determine the root cause. Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs) were allowed under a piece of legislation passed in 1982, the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982. The bill, whose full title was "An Act to revitalize the housing industry by strengthening the financial stability of home mortgage lending institutions and ensuring the availability of home mortgage loans," was a Reagan Administration initiative. Combine an ARM with an interest only payment component and you begin to realize, "Houston, we have a problem."

Clayton, as you stated relating to CEO compensation, the mortgage crisis is a complex issue. Borrowers bear some fault, institutions bear some responsibility, and government deserves some blame. IMO, institutions and their employees should have the lion's share though. Why? Here is a comparable example:

You see a mechanic and they charge you to fix your car. Now, he/she is a business person out to make a living and does so based on how often you visit the garage. But above all, the technician holds the trust of all his/her clients to direct their car care in a way that is best suited for longevity of the vehicle, not solely to make money.

How does the relate to mortgages? Many borrowers are not as fiscally astute as they need to be (similar to people not knowing how to check oil let alone change a tire in the mechanic example). So, they trust a banker/broker to help guide them toward their their ultimate goal, the longevity of continued housing. But, the banker need not worry about going out of business (unlike the mechanic) even if, these are bad decisions that were not in the best interests of a mortgagee. The banker/broker bundled the risk and sold it to unsuspecting investors. When he did so, the package received a rating of grade AAA, because there were supposed to be good mortgages to balance out the bad. But, that is not what happened now is it. Instead of a 95-5 ratio (not realistic simply an easy example) they put in 85-15. Those ten additional mortgages paid the banker his cut, but slammed the investor (and/or Fannie/Freddie) with the final cost and financial risk.

One last side note, the pink statement was from USA Today, not any of the other sources cited.

Reagan had to do something what was the interest rate when ole jimma carter was in office hmmmm

[Clayton_Wetter]

A few thoughts.

Woodrow Wilson created the banking crisis? How? Are you referring to the 16th Constitutional Amendment or the 19th? His attempt to remove child labor from factories? Help me understand your logic here.

Let's not forget that a system of government (representative democracy) is not the same thing as an economic system (capitalism vs. socialism). Is Milton Friedman the only economic theory that you think works? Seems to me that Keynesian theory built America into the economic powerhouse we have had over the years. Also, how could corporations be what they are today without a history of govt. subsiding: rail, roads, electrification, education, retirement, etc.

Net neutrality: I guess govt could control the net under this, but the underpinnings have more to do with disallowing corporations the ability to block of slow down material they think you should not see or to chose what they want you to see. Also, this goes further back in history than the current admin, but I understand that does not fit y'alls "Marxist" narrative.

I did not say that Woodrow Wilson started the banking crisis. I can't seem to get you to think out of your structured philosophy if that's what you want to call it.

If a tornado was heading straight at your house, would you still be busy trying to talk about other topics and ignoring a reality check? It's like you read a book and stopped at a certain point and have not turned a page since.

[anthonycacace]

"Things that make you go hmmmm."

Reagan had to do something what was the interest rate when ole jimma carter was in office hmmmm

But, an ARM tends to charge hirer interest as it is generally pegged to the prime rate, or some similar measure like LIBOR, with a premium percentage added (say prime + 2%). If you meant to say, he needed to try and free up availability of funds for some who had less than stellar credit, that I can agree with. But, the prime rate had begun to decline prior to passage of the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 and it increased slightly in the a period between 1983-84. Thus, the numbers indicate this was not solely about lower interest.

[anthonycacace]

I did not say that Woodrow Wilson started the banking crisis. I can't seem to get you to think out of your structured philosophy if that's what you want to call it.

I understand that. The comment was rhetorical in nature. I asked for some help regarding your logic. So in simpler terms, what does Wilson have to due with our current situation? I hoped you would see the bait/inaccuracy in relation to the Constitutional amendments. But alas, it appears this was missed. I chose those two, 16th and 19th, because they were passed just prior and under his admin's tenure, respectively. However, a prez has no direct effect on them. Also, I hoped you would look them up for the ironic aspects.

If a tornado was heading straight at your house, would you still be busy trying to talk about other topics and ignoring a reality check? It's like you read a book and stopped at a certain point and have not turned a page since.

I provided you plenty of other opportunity to discuss related issues: e.g. Freedman vs. Keynesian economic theory; what the govt has done over the years in relation to infrastructure expenditures versus private enterprise running them. Simply b/c you see the world (reality) one way does not mean everyone sees the same exact image. For example, the British see the American Revolution far differently then we do. This does not mean they are different realities, it simply means the parities are looking at a given situation with their own perspectives and perceptions.

I understand now that you do not wish to have a discussion. You simply wish to say, "I am right, here is why and everyone who does not see this is an idiot." (Paraphrasing and simplifying here) So, you will be likely be thankful when I say this is my last post related to this tailgate posting.

[LITE-INN]

when carter was prez interest rates where as high as 17 precent or in the ball park

[Clayton_Wetter]

I understand that. The comment was rhetorical in nature. I asked for some help regarding your logic. So in simpler terms, what does Wilson have to due with our current situation? I hoped you would see the bait/inaccuracy in relation to the Constitutional amendments. But alas, it appears this was missed. I chose those two, 16th and 19th, because they were passed just prior and under his admin's tenure, respectively. However, a prez has no direct effect on them. Also, I hoped you would look them up for the ironic aspects.


I provided you plenty of other opportunity to discuss related issues: e.g. Freedman vs. Keynesian economic theory; what the govt has done over the years in relation to infrastructure expenditures versus private enterprise running them. Simply b/c you see the world (reality) one way does not mean everyone sees the same exact image. For example, the British see the American Revolution far differently then we do. This does not mean they are different realities, it simply means the parities are looking at a given situation with their own perspectives and perceptions.

I understand now that you do not wish to have a discussion. You simply wish to say, "I am right, here is why and everyone who does not see this is an idiot." (Paraphrasing and simplifying here) So, you will be likely be thankful when I say this is my last post related to this tailgate posting.

Not trying to be offensive with my replies but I look at things differntly than you and it puzzles me that you stick to the technical topics and don't seem to acknowledge the moral decay of society and its influence on everything. Reality is sometimes easy to ignore as long as one has the history of security and an everyday appearance of it to go along. And no I'm not thankful that this is your last post. If you disagree with so called conspiracy theories please continue on. And start shooting these "theories" down with alteranative theories.

I would rather be all wrong than right about many of these topics.

Also you have my apologies. I have a lot of respect for you, Anthony.

[wallcrusher]

Not trying to be offensive with my replies but I look at things differntly than you and it puzzles me that you stick to the technical topics and don't seem to acknowledge the moral decay of society and its influence on everything. Reality is sometimes easy to ignore as long as one has the history of security and an everyday appearance of it to go along. And no I'm not thankful that this is your last post. If you disagree with so called conspiracy theories please continue on. And start shooting these "theories" down with alteranative theories.

I would rather be all wrong than right about many of these topics.

You're wasting time and precious brain cells.....may I suggest Modern Reloads for Zombie's of the 21rst Century

[petesvoice]

i have to laugh,,,,,,,,,

obamas policies didnt work because the ridiculous right blocked anything from being done,, now how can you hate a country so bad that you want to bring it down for the sake of making a president look bad,,, thats as sick as the people trying to do it,, after this election 2 things will happen,, either whats left of this country will fall apart or there will be open season on republicans so they'd better keep their guns they are always afraid of losing,, now you know why their afraid,,, ruining our education system,, making workers work for nothing and taking away any program to help people must make them feel good,, thinking there is a dollar they havent stolen yet must keep them awake,,,,,,,, lol

[wallcrusher]

obamas policies didnt work because the ridiculous right blocked anything from being done,, now how can you hate a country so bad that you want to bring it down for the sake of making a president look bad,,, thats as sick as the people trying to do it,, after this election 2 things will happen,, either whats left of this country will fall apart or there will be open season on republicans so they'd better keep their guns they are always afraid of losing,, now you know why their afraid,,, ruining our education system,, making workers work for nothing and taking away any program to help people must make them feel good,, thinking there is a dollar they havent stolen yet must keep them awake,,,,,,,, lol

The "right has provided countless bills and, The dems will not negotiate!....Anything that has been sent to good ole' Harry in the senate, has been rejected.
Which caliber, from my "array" would you suggest?
I have a friend in N.J. that will rent tent space!.....has a gorgeous view of Long Island.......I can hook you up!

[LITE-INN]

hey petesvoice you mean GW don't you oh how we forget

[halfast07]

“His (Obama's campaign) narrative has got to be the Republican Congress is the problem,” said Norquist in an exclusive interview on Wednesday. “Therefore, I believe the Democrats will sink the supercommittee in order to say that the Republicans were unreasonable.”

“The Republicans could dance around naked and throw flowers out at them (Democrats) — and promise them their first born — and they would still reject it and vote no,” says Norquist of supercommittee Democrats.

[skids]

obamas policies didnt work because the ridiculous right blocked anything from being done,, now how can you hate a country so bad that you want to bring it down for the sake of making a president look bad,,, thats as sick as the people trying to do it,, after this election 2 things will happen,, either whats left of this country will fall apart or there will be open season on republicans so they'd better keep their guns they are always afraid of losing,, now you know why their afraid,,, ruining our education system,, making workers work for nothing and taking away any program to help people must make them feel good,, thinking there is a dollar they havent stolen yet must keep them awake,,,,,,,, lol

I have to laugh too! I have YET to find a liberal who can explain how the Republicans "blocked" ANYTHING when the Dems had a SUPER MAJORITY, both houses and the Presidency!! You wanna take a shot Petey?

Seems to me the libs don't want to admit they couldn't get the Dems united enough on the lame policies to use the majorities they had. They still had to resort to bribery to shove Obamcare through.

[MotorMouth]

The socialist Democrats just couldn't for the life of them get those "blue dog" Democrats to roll over and sit up. All they wanted to do was play dead.