bush is a socialist

[lamboguy]

the government that this man runs wants to privatise the profits, and share the losses with the public. this is exactly what has happened with fanny and freddy mae, i suspect they are going to do the same thing with AIG and GM.

i want any one of you experts who claim that its the lefties from the congress that are the socialist's, this proves president bush is nothing short of a socialist.

[riskman]

"Professor Nuriel Roubini of New York University is probably close to the truth: by the end of 2009, 40% of all Americans who live in a home for which there is a mortgage will be underwater. That is, they will owe more money on their homes than they could sell the homes for after discounts and real estate commissions. The bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was justified officially because the government says that there has to be continuity in the mortgage market. This continuity refers to future sales of homes. It is an attempt to maintain the high price of homes. This is supposedly a good idea. This is a standard government good idea: "Keep prices higher than they would have been if there had been no government intervention." In other words, it is an attack on consumers. Virtually all government intervention is an attack on consumers. It may be an attack on consumers in the majority on behalf of consumers in the minority, but it is nonetheless an attack on consumers.

The government almost always intervenes on behalf of the suppliers, not on behalf of the consumers. So it is in this case. The justification has been that there must be orderly markets for homes. This means keeping sale prices higher than the free market would produce.

Let's not kid ourselves. This bailout is a subsidy to the suppliers of homes. It is a subsidy to the few surviving homebuilders, to people who own homes, and to people who may want to sell their home to buy an even bigger home later on.

This is an assault on home buyers. It is an assault on anyone who has saved 20% down payment and who wants to buy a reasonably priced home, so that his monthly payments will total a little more than what he has to pay in rent. He wants to move up from renting to home ownership. But, because about two-thirds of Americans are already home owners, and about half of these are in debt to lenders, and something like 40% of these indebted people in a year will find that they are underwater, the government intervenes in order to bail them out. Homeowners vote as a bloc. Renters tend not to vote as a bloc. Homeowners understand that they need a subsidy to make their investment pay off. Thrifty, future-oriented renters do not understand that this subsidy is what keeps them renting."

More here

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north652.html

[delayjf]

I wish I got the subsidy (tax breaks) a home owner gets. The two of you might want to read the article I just posted.

[ddog]

this is the main problem , there should NOT BE a tax sub for homeowners.

But, it is beyind debate from both sides of the corrupt political classes, it's one way they buy the votes of the fools from both sides and make them think they are doing them a favour.

what idiots.

[lamboguy]

i guess they decided to bail out AIG, it is only going to cost US $85 billion and a little misery plus interest to go with it.

if any of us go the window and bet our money and we pick the wrong number, they say thanks for the bet, go get yourself some more money and try again.

it don't work that way with the thieves that STOLE you money to begin with, they bet the wrong horse and the government takes the money from all of us and gives it to the slick guy that lost it.

heads they win and tails you lose

thank you george bush

and thank you mr akavano

[pandy]

We are getting screwed again, another bailout. What pisses me off is that the taxpayers become partners with these failing companies, but when the banking industry bounces back and the companies start making huge profits again, we will not share in any of the profits. We only get to share in the losses.

[lamboguy]

pandy, you hit the nail on the head. this is just another word for socialism.

when we went out to vote for mr bush, we thought we were getting a compasionate conserveative, turns out he is a leftist socialist. and without a doubt.

[bigskyguy]

so lets hear now from the spinmeisters how this is the Democrats fault.

[DJofSD]

this is the main problem , there should NOT BE a tax sub for homeowners.

But, it is beyind debate from both sides of the corrupt political classes, it's one way they buy the votes of the fools from both sides and make them think they are doing them a favour.

what idiots.Tell me, do you know why there is a deduction on your federal tax return for home mortgage interest? Or are you just parroting some line you heard somewhere?

[bigskyguy]

So AIG gets socialistically rescued by the feds, but when they recover they're going to be making money in a free market. What a bunch of hypocrites. Reagan's VOODOO economics never worked except for the very rich.

[PaceAdvantage]

so lets hear now from the spinmeisters how this is the Democrats fault.Or, let's here it from the spinmeisters how this is Bush/Palin's fault....:lol: :lol: :lol:

Bush was sitting at the risk management desk at Lehman, right? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[pandy]

so lets hear now from the spinmeisters how this is the Democrats fault.

The corporations were greedy but the government did de-regulate the industry, Carter, Clinton, and Bush, and the Feds kept lowering interest rates, which also helped push home sales higher. One thing that know one is mentioning, homes prices shot up to artificially inflated prices so middle class couples were buying homes that they couldn't afford, yet most of these houses were actually quite modest. For instance, I grew up in a brick ranch house on Long Island that my parents paid $20k for. That same type of house a year or two ago was selling for $500k, which is absurd. My dad, who is a former stock broker, has been telling me for 3 or 4 years now that a banking collapse was coming because he couldn't see how these young couples could afford to keep paying their mortgages.

Anyone who's worked for publicly traded companies knows how these corporations are under pressure to push their stock price higher and higher and this creates an atmosphere of corruption and greed. This is the dark side of the stock market. When I was in sales, I saw managers turn their heads to corruption because they wanted to exceed their quotas. In companies that are privately owned, these type of problems are rare.

[lamboguy]

when someone is the boss, you cannot turn your head and let the theives pilfer the people that you govern. mr bush turned his head, you know it better than anyone else. if your message board doesn't function proberly do you have anyone else to blame but your self?

[Tom]

So you are blaming Bush for not keeping the corrupt democrat in line and allowing them to manipulate the market and steal billions for themselves? For not coming down of Dodd for being a thief? And Frank for lying to cover up his profiteering?





Interesting.
Here's a tip for you....if you ever lay down sod, GREEN SIDE UP! :lol:

[lamboguy]

i am blaming the whole system, bush, dodd, kennedy, chaney, and whoever you want to throw in. when you are at the top you are the boss though. the boss is the boss,and ultimately the boss is responsible for the problems whether he created them or not. it is his job to oversee everything and make proper judgements. this is precisely where the current president has failed!

you got that part right tommy my man

[Tom]

What part of the constitution outlines that?
The president is hardly the Boss - his one branch of three. He has specific duties, all of them in the constitution.

[ddog]

Tell me, do you know why there is a deduction on your federal tax return for home mortgage interest? Or are you just parroting some line you heard somewhere?


that's such a strange question (to me anyway), I don't get what you think you are asking for.
Forgiven my slowness on the uptake but if you could state what exactly you want me to reply to I would be glad to give you a reply????

why the deduction is there???? in the theoretical realm or why some people think it needs to be there , as in a good thing, or the effects of it being there NOW or why it was started in the first place ????l

sorry , i don't get the question.

oh and the parrot shot, wow that really stings , my captain.


in it's most basic form it's clear WHY it's there wouldn't you agree.
to allow a deduction??

[ddog]

What part of the constitution outlines that?
The president is hardly the Boss - his one branch of three. He has specific duties, all of them in the constitution.

yeah and it would be GREAT if they would stick to JUST THOSE.


what a hoot.
:bang:

[highnote]

Some food for thought...

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/105768/Socialism-21st-Century-Style

The Federal Reserve and the Bush administration believe the threat of defaults by A.I.G. on a lot of unregulated derivative contracts creates a national emergency. It’s too bad they didn’t think of that when they were opposing any efforts to regulate those markets. That would have been interfering with free enterprise. This move, somehow, is not.

[ddog]

i just don't see the socialism angle in this.

it equates much more to fuedalism to me.

these rescues are not for the masses , at least past the upper 1% , most of this junk could and will fail, we are just delaying the price discovery of all this junk still hidden out of site by the slow rolling rescues.

I still think the FED HAD to do AIG, the credit side couldn't digest all of this at once.
When everyone is running on short term borrowing as we have become so accustomed to , you can stop that drug overnight.
I have been posting about this for over a year or two here.

It always follows the binge and we brought on our own binge.
But as PA would say "It's different this time" ya, right!


We have bought a little time at the expense of a protracted recession and much delayed recovery.

[highnote]

Whatever it's called, it ain't pretty.

Those tax cuts McCain keeps promising -- or Obama's health care initiatives -- fugetaboutit. Ain't going to happen.

We'll probably find a way to keep funding the war, though.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080917/pl_bloomberg/a8zvtv0iunks

The federal government has committed hundreds of billions of dollars this year to stimulate the economy, rescue failing Bear Stearns Cos. and American International Group Inc., and take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It may extend hundreds of billions more to buy distressed mortgage debt, prop up Detroit automakers and stave off recession.

Those expenses, on top of a 2009 budget deficit projected to approach $500 billion, will make it hard for Obama to find money for universal health care, clean energy and early education, or for McCain to enact $3.3 trillion in promised tax cuts over eight years.

``It's going to be a very hostile environment for major new initiatives,'' said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a non-partisan budget watchdog group. Paying for financial-industry rescue measures will be the next president's top task, he says, ``rather than some exciting new agenda, like health care for all or taxes for none.''

[JustRalph]

i am blaming the whole system, bush, dodd, kennedy, chaney, and whoever you want to throw in. when you are at the top you are the boss though. the boss is the boss,and ultimately the boss is responsible for the problems whether he created them or not. it is his job to oversee everything and make proper judgements. this is precisely where the current president has failed!

you got that part right tommy my man

of the people you mention, the one least at fault is Bush. Amazing, you need to take a step back and look at this stuff again. Bush maybe should be firing a Cabinet post or two, but putting the blame in the Oval office is reactionary.

[wonatthewire1]

of the people you mention, the one least at fault is Bush. Amazing, you need to take a step back and look at this stuff again. Bush maybe should be firing a Cabinet post or two, but putting the blame in the Oval office is reactionary.


Quick question: would you have the exact same quote if Clinton were in office, or Barry or Biden?

[DJofSD]

that's such a strange question (to me anyway), I don't get what you think you are asking for.
Forgiven my slowness on the uptake but if you could state what exactly you want me to reply to I would be glad to give you a reply????

why the deduction is there???? in the theoretical realm or why some people think it needs to be there , as in a good thing, or the effects of it being there NOW or why it was started in the first place ????l

sorry , i don't get the question.

oh and the parrot shot, wow that really stings , my captain.


in it's most basic form it's clear WHY it's there wouldn't you agree.
to allow a deduction??It's not a theoretical question at all: I thought it was very straightforward.

I will take your reponse to mean you don't know or understand why home mortgage interest is deductable.

[46zilzal]

Quick question: would you have the exact same quote if Clinton were in office, or Barry or Biden?
Are you kidding? He would find a way to make them FURRINORS too.

[robert99]

These actions are nothing more than the transfer of unprecedented levels of risk from the elite directly onto the taxpayers of USA.
It does not bear the slightest comparison with such a noble Christian ideal as Socialism. Clause 4 of the Socialist manifesto is:

"To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service."

Is that what USA is getting - just the pips?

[46zilzal]

These actions are nothing more than the transfer of unprecedented levels of risk from the elite directly onto the taxpayers of USA.

More likely what has gone on for the last 8 years: steal from those of limited means and give it to the wealthy. Did You get a load of that severance package from the AIG head man? million of dollars and guess who has to pay that???

[lamboguy]

are you guys nuts? do you mean to tell me the guy that runs show means nothing? what is he a puppet?

i don't understand. if i have a business and i don't run it right, i lose they close me up.

if i have slow horse, i pay the bills, the trainer don't care, its not his fault that the horse i brought him can't run.

[46zilzal]

vAIG pays Sullivan $47M severance package
Star News Services
Published: Wednesday, July 02, 2008

NEW YORK - American International Group Inc AIG.N said it paid a $47-million severance package to former chief executive Martin J. Sullivan, whose resignation took effect Tuesday.

Sullivan, who left his position in mid-June after two quarters of record losses at AIG and saw its share price fall by half, will receive a severance of $15 million and a bonus of $4 million for the portion of the year he worked, according to a regulatory filing.

[Show Me the Wire]

are you guys nuts? do you mean to tell me the guy that runs show means nothing? what is he a puppet?

i don't understand. if i have a business and i don't run it right, i lose they close me up.

if i have slow horse, i pay the bills, the trainer don't care, its not his fault that the horse i brought him can't run.

Not as nutty as Pelosi and anybody that believes the pablum about Pelosi and her party not having any responsibility for the economic melt down.

[delayjf]

would you have the exact same quote if Clinton were in office,
Well, while we're at it, who was it that signed the Graham, leach, Biley Act - Clinton.

Who appointed Franlin Raines to head Fannie Mae - Clinton

Who was calling for increased regulation of Fannie Mae / Freddie MAC back in 2003 - Bush

Draw your own conclusions.

[46zilzal]

Not as nutty as Pelosi and anybody that believes the pablum about Pelosi and her party not having any responsibility for the economic melt down.
not a shred of evidence for that as the rutabaga continues to pour money down a bottomless pit in Iraq....and BKR is there to lap up a lot of it.

[Show Me the Wire]

Dear rutabaga basher:

There is not a shred of evidence, about your new agenda, that the Iraq military excursion caused the current melt down on Wall Street.

Once again you are off point with your zilly agenda.

[46zilzal]

Dear rutabaga basher:

There is not a shred of evidence, about your new agenda, that the Iraq military excursion caused the current melt down on Wall Street.

Once again you are off point with your zilly agenda.
Only a Nobel prize winning economist quoted it as the one the sources in this current situation.

Available at multiple sources on line:

"Stiglitz said the reason related in part to the war in Iraq and the very negative effect on the economy."They didn’t want Americans to know exactly how bad the war was for the economy so they flooded it with liquidity, they looked the other way with regulations and they deliberately, I think, postponed the problem into the future and now we’re paying the price.”

[Show Me the Wire]

Hey delayjf what is worse is that another Dem president, LBJ, in my opinion the biggest crook to hold the office, privatized Fannie Mae, which meant Freddie Mac had to be created to compete against Fannie Mae in the secondary mortgage market.

[Show Me the Wire]

Dear rutabaga basher:

You understand there is a large difference between negative effect and causation. Does this economist believe, contrary to the other economists, that the Iraq military excursion is the cause of the investment banking losses on Wall Street?

If not your zilly agenda is off point again.

[DRIVEWAY]

Well, while we're at it, who was it that signed the Graham, leach, Biley Act - Clinton.

Who appointed Franlin Raines to head Fannie Mae - Clinton

Who was calling for increased regulation of Fannie Mae / Freddie MAC back in 2003 - Bush

Draw your own conclusions.

Home ownership grew by nearly 10% while Raines eases lending standards and prices rise unsustainably. When Bush tried to put the brakes on in 2003, the problem was manageable.

Raines receives millions in pay and bonus while the housing market continues to bubble and then begins bursting in 2006. By the time this condition resolves itself 1-2 Trillion will evaporate and as much as 40% of the home owners will be under water (mortgage greater than home value).

[46zilzal]

Dear rutabaga basher:

You understand there is a large difference between negative effect and causation. Does this economist believe, contrary to the other economists, that the Iraq military excursion is the cause of the investment banking losses on Wall Street?

If not your zilly agenda is off point again.
I'm not on the hook for all that useless spending but YOU ARE.

As the robot said in ALIEN. "You have my sympathies."

[Show Me the Wire]

I'm not on the hook for all that useless spending but YOU ARE......"

Bingo, because you are a citizen of a foriegn country. That is exactly why your opinions about U.S. politics do not count.

[wonatthewire1]

Well, while we're at it, who was it that signed the Graham, leach, Biley Act - Clinton.

Who appointed Franlin Raines to head Fannie Mae - Clinton

Who was calling for increased regulation of Fannie Mae / Freddie MAC back in 2003 - Bush

Draw your own conclusions.


GLBA was veto proof when it passed through both houses of R controlled congress

Raines wasn't "appointed" to Fannie Mae by Clinton, the BoD appoints

Bush had both houses of congress - couldn't get his buds to go along...?
And wasn't Mudd appointed after Raines? Couldn't get a real vet to move either? Hmmm...

Nice try though - B for effort!

:faint:

[Tom]

are you guys nuts? do you mean to tell me the guy that runs show means nothing? what is he a puppet?

i don't understand. if i have a business and i don't run it right, i lose they close me up.

if i have slow horse, i pay the bills, the trainer don't care, its not his fault that the horse i brought him can't run.

When the HELL are you going to look up things before you continue to make FOOL of yourself? Bush does not run things. Congress - specifically, Frank, Dodd, and Obama - have been getting bribery disguised as contributions to look the other way and allow toroughly corrupt CEO's trash the market. Every one has a hand in this, but it far more dems in office than anyone.

[delayjf]

New York times article outlining Bush's efforts to regulate Fannie / Freddie back in 2003.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

[Show Me the Wire]

Where is Congress again? Congress is notably absent in the AIG fiasco. Congress should be using its oversight powers a
concerning funding a loan with tax money. As ususal Pelosi and Reid are abdicating their responsibilties to the U.S. electorate.

This Dem leadership is why I would not vote for any democrat in the election. It seems the dem motto is "We do nothing, but pass the buck"

[delayjf]

Raines wasn't "appointed" to Fannie Mae by Clinton, the BoD appoints
I stand corrected the President appoints the Directors to the board - who select the CEO. Is it safe to say that Clinton appointees put a former Clinton Budget adviser on the board??

[Tom]

Dodd, Rangle, O'Bama, Frank - start their with indictments and work back.
Seantors, congressjerks, CEOs, we should be forming lines at prisons for these creeps. We should send any elected offical to Gitmo.

[lamboguy]

bottom line here we are in tough times right now. and you know what happens now, its time for george bush to get going. by the blame game that you are all playing now you must think bush is a pure genious because it took over 7 years before the hens came out to roost. he did a great job sweeping under the rug. therefore he deserves to be hired as a rug doctor.

but go right ahead and don't blame the boss, blame everyone else.

[JustRalph]

Quick question: would you have the exact same quote if Clinton were in office, or Barry or Biden?

Sure I would. I don't think the President is involved in this stuff at a level that puts it all on his shoulders. I don't think he controls gas prices either. People act like he is responsible for shit that he has no control over. Clinton had no control over the same stuff. They leave this stuff up to their cabinet officers.

Cabinet Officers are there for a reason. To handle different areas of the country. Bush should probably have canned a few people a couple years back, and I hold him responsible for that. But you can't put the Blame for Liar loans and all the related crap done by corrupt CEO's and cheating banks in the oval office.

The remedy for now is in the hands of the U.S. Attorneys.



46zil Stop following me around from thread to thread and taking pot shots at me. You are a friggin Troll and everybody knows it.

[JustRalph]

From the NY Times 5 years ago

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

The Dem Response:

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said."


How in the hell do you put this in Bush's lap now? Amazing..........Barney Frank should be tossed out of Congress and sent back to running his Male Prostitution ring...........

[bigmack]

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Barney said today "We should have increased regulation". :lol:

Man, I love this guy. (No, not that kinda love)

http://floortwo.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/barney-frank.jpg
Barney "Done" Frank


Q.So suddenly the government is in the business of intervening in corporate America. What does that mean?
Barn. The Republicans - their own philosophy blew up in their face. They were so extreme in their insistence that there be no government intervention that they have wound up provoking far more government intervention than the Democrats ever would have.
http://www.boston.com/business/markets/articles/2008/09/18/frank_lack_of_government_regulation_led_to_trouble s_plaguing_wall_street/

[Tom]

Barney said today "We should have increased regulation". :lol:

Man, I love this guy. (No, not that kinda love)




And Barney loves you, too. :eek::eek::eek:

[NJ Stinks]

Where is Congress again? Congress is notably absent in the AIG fiasco. Congress should be using its oversight powers a
concerning funding a loan with tax money. As ususal Pelosi and Reid are abdicating their responsibilties to the U.S. electorate.

This Dem leadership is why I would not vote for any democrat in the election. It seems the dem motto is "We do nothing, but pass the buck"

You remind me of the parent whose kid always gets into trouble. When are you going to stop making excuses for your kid? It's not the school's fault that he's a bad apple and a spoiled brat.

Keep voting Republican. And keeping betting on Zippy Chippy.

Oh yea. And keep blaming your wife for letting you go to the track! :D

[The Judge]

You can't pay people 300 Million dollars for nothing and not expect it to have an effect somewhere down the line. When these people get this type of payday what do they do with it? I would imagine they would take it off the table and play as safe a game as they can.

To blame the consumer is crazy I live in California and I saw no home foreclosuers until there was a so-called crisis. If the bottom was falling out shouldn't there have been a reduction in prices first. There was no reduction in home prices until "after" the crisis was in full swing.

People were paying their morgages what they couldn't pay were the gimmic loans. Where there was a ballon payment due or the monthly payments went up 20-30% in one swoop. This could have all been re-negotiated and the people could have stayed in their homes and continued to pay money to the companies that are now asking for public money.

Before anyone gets a dime of public money the people who run the companies should have to put up some good faith money (that they got or have given away in excecutive pay) and be personally liable for at least a good share of the debt. If I want a loan from these same people this is what they would do to you, they would say its good business practice. You have to be personally liable or you can't get the loan.

[delayjf]

Judge,

I agree that the loan officers, underwriters etc should be held accountable, I work with a Lady who was in that industry for 20 years and the stories she tells will really get your blood boiling. I cannot believe they cannot charge these guy with fraud.

One question, if they could have re-negotiated why didn't they??

[Show Me the Wire]

NJ Stinks:

Fortunately, I never had to make excuses for my chidren. I took responsibility for them and never relied on schools to do my parenting.

Always nice to be personally attacked over a truthful posting. Your community activist mentality of attacking the person instead of the facts
or logic illustrates your inability to logically refute the thought stated in my post.

nuff said.

[Show Me the Wire]

BTW NJ Stinks, do you want to make an excuse for Reid's not knowing what to do and his despair, so let's adjourn and leave it up to the fed remarks? The Congressional leadership is doing exactly what I lamented about. They are abdicating their responsibility.

So why would I want to vote for a party whose leadership continully abdicates its responsibility to the so-called failures and rutabegas? I don't do you?

[ddog]

wire, you and the others don't or can't get IT.

The best thing for Congress to DO, is nothing , nothing , nothing.

They don't know crap and anything they do , either side is only to feather a nest somewhere.

I pray for Tom's nuke attack on Russia to take place, Ruskies would likely take out DC, if we could stop there , I say it's a plus.


Oh, check out one other little childish deal here.

This was not new to anyone who pays attention.

Chris Cox(read KEN DOLL) should have never been in charge of anything , ever.
Just another example of placing airheads(total) in positions of some authority and getting what you asked for.

That is the real scam in lots of this, the executive sends in these clowns,that's all on the "buck stops there" guy.



Shorts my ass, got nothing to do with this, uptick my ass, maybe 20 years that uptick meant something, with the vol of trades now it won't/don't mean diddly.

Just more clowns either terminal stupid or shills looking to layoff blame.

children you say, that's an apt description of most running the place the last 20 years.


http://www.nysun.com/business/ex-sec-official-blames-agency-for-blow-up/86130/

[ddog]

Judge,

I agree that the loan officers, underwriters etc should be held accountable, I work with a Lady who was in that industry for 20 years and the stories she tells will really get your blood boiling. I cannot believe they cannot charge these guy with fraud.

One question, if they could have re-negotiated why didn't they??


Yah hold THEM over there to account.
Rich , really rich.

The system generated "profits ha ha ha" and everyone took those , no one cared to know how they were generated.

After all , everything was fine , no need to look under the covers, look at that market , Wow, look at those numbers, who hooh!!!!!!

Looking in the mirror on a wide scale is the culprit staring right back at you.

[46zilzal]

So why would I want to vote for a party whose leadership continully abdicates its responsibility to the so-called failures and rutabegas? I don't do you?
RUTABAGA the CLOWN at the helm,the brain dead clown who is responsible for thousand of dead people and screwing u p things from top to bottom.....What a putz and history will accord him that ranking right there with Warning G. Harding and Trick Dick

[Show Me the Wire]

ddog:

I get it, but you do not get my point. The dem leadership are a bunch of bone heads, whom have no clue. Why would anyone want to support such stupidity? That is my point.

[Show Me the Wire]

Zilly,

Doesn't, your standard, make the dem leadership even worse since they abdicate and defer to someone, you claim to be a failure as a president and human being?

[Tom]

If 46 had a point, he would stab himself with it.

[ddog]

ddog:

I get it, but you do not get my point. The dem leadership are a bunch of bone heads, whom have no clue. Why would anyone want to support such stupidity? That is my point.

Good sir, i totally agree, can't we take out hits on all of them or move Dc to an undisclosed location during the elections?

Anything to stop the zombies running around up there from actually thinking they know what to do!

Pls , god save us from all of those scum.


I think at this point , I vote for the pol who says as of Jan 1 we are going to adopt a one time biblical jubilee policy.

Ron Paul may not be most people's cup of tea, but he is DEAD on DEAD ON right on this financial crap.

[Show Me the Wire]

Tom:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[JustRalph]

One question, if they could have re-negotiated why didn't they??

Because in the long run, they make more money if they foreclose.

That is a theory my attorney brought up.

Try this:

they loan 200k on a house in 2003

They collect 1200 bucks a month for five years 60x1200= 72k

They foreclose on the house and re-sell it for 170k They make 40k in five years. And it is guaranteed cash in a market that is collapsing. If they re-negotiate they have admin costs and nothing but a promise. They want this market to turn over as fast as possible and start over again. The only way they stay in business is to start making loans again. Btw, the new buyer gets a serious break on his new loan, with the same company.

I see some holes in this scenario, but my attorney says this is the prevailing theory in legal circles. That after the first year, the Mortgage houses decided this was the best route. Get it over with and shake out the small guys.

[wonatthewire1]

Sure I would. I don't think the President is involved in this stuff at a level that puts it all on his shoulders. I don't think he controls gas prices either. People act like he is responsible for shit that he has no control over. Clinton had no control over the same stuff. They leave this stuff up to their cabinet officers.

Cabinet Officers are there for a reason. To handle different areas of the country. Bush should probably have canned a few people a couple years back, and I hold him responsible for that. But you can't put the Blame for Liar loans and all the related crap done by corrupt CEO's and cheating banks in the oval office.

The remedy for now is in the hands of the U.S. Attorneys.



46zil Stop following me around from thread to thread and taking pot shots at me. You are a friggin Troll and everybody knows it.

Thanks for the response

[NJ Stinks]

NJ Stinks:

Fortunately, I never had to make excuses for my chidren. I took responsibility for them and never relied on schools to do my parenting.

Always nice to be personally attacked over a truthful posting. Your community activist mentality of attacking the person instead of the facts
or logic illustrates your inability to logically refute the thought stated in my post.

nuff said.

I had no idea if you had kids or not, Show Me The Wire. I was speaking metaphorically.

No personal offense intended. I just think once in a while conservatives can blame the guy they actually elected.

[The Judge]

I think JustRalph's attorney got it right. The group holding the paper's wouldn't do it but they could have done it. If both parties argree you can re-negotiate just about anything. I really feel that they felt they could make more money (new fees also) on a re-sale.

Don't sale those informercials short there were thousands of real estate buyers ala Carlton Sheets out there doing just that churning fees buying distressed property etc. The banks and mortgage holders were having a field day.

Speaking of fees I took my wife's check made out to me to "her bank" to cash. After requesting two pieces of I.D phoning my wife and stamping the check they tell me as they counted out the money that there was a $5 fee. I had them return the check and left the bank. The bank was Wells Fargo.

[PaceAdvantage]

Quick question: would you have the exact same quote if Clinton were in office, or Barry or Biden?Why bother with political affinities? Just provide some proof. The truth shall set you free!

[Secretariat]

I guess now GW and Repubs can socialize health care since he's decided to socialize the financial sector.

So maybe one good thing will come out of this. Repubs can no longer use the argument they're agaisnt socialization with their own nationization of AIG and Fannie and Freddie.

[pandy]

I guess now GW and Repubs can socialize health care since he's decided to socialize the financial sector.

So maybe one good thing will come out of this. Repubs can no longer use the argument they're agaisnt socialization with their own nationization of AIG and Fannie and Freddie.

They really didn't want to do this, but if they didn't, we'd have a depression. If the banks don't have money to lend, our economy would collapse. This had to be done, and there's no guarantee it will work.

[JustRalph]

They really didn't want to do this, but if they didn't, we'd have a depression. If the banks don't have money to lend, our economy would collapse. This had to be done, and there's no guarantee it will work.

exactly right! :ThmbUp:

The markets seem to think it will stop the bleeding, but I am not so sure.

[Secretariat]

They really didn't want to do this, but if they didn't, we'd have a depression. If the banks don't have money to lend, our economy would collapse. This had to be done, and there's no guarantee it will work.

Pandy, we may have a depression anyway. Our economy is already collapsing. We just printed 700 billion pieces of paper. What do you think that's going to do to the value of your dollar and what do you think this debt is going to do to inflation. And why must good and honest and debt free citizens pick up the welfare costs for the experts on risk assessment on Wall Street?

Read the text proposal of the legislation. This is a total takeover by the Treasury Department without any oversight or judical review and only a presentation to Congress each quarter. This is beyond socialism. This is a dictator's action.

My local banks have money to lend. We're talking about "bad mortage debt". Don't buy into the myth. After all...

"The fundamentals of the economy are strong." - John McCain...errr...by fundamentals, I - uh- mean the workers are the fundamentals...I think for now.

[pandy]

Pandy, we may have a depression anyway. Our economy is already collapsing. We just printed 700 billion pieces of paper. What do you think that's going to do to the value of your dollar and what do you think this debt is going to do to inflation. And why must good and honest and debt free citizens pick up the welfare costs for the experts on risk assessment on Wall Street?

Read the text proposal of the legislation. This is a total takeover by the Treasury Department without any oversight or judical review and only a presentation to Congress each quarter. This is beyond socialism. This is a dictator's action.

My local banks have money to lend. We're talking about "bad mortage debt". Don't buy into the myth. After all...

"The fundamentals of the economy are strong." - John McCain...errr...by fundamentals, I - uh- mean the workers are the fundamentals...I think for now.

This decision is not made by Bush, or anyone else but the guys who were APPOINTED to this position, and they know a lot more about the economy than you do. They went to Congress and said do this or face a complete meltdown. This is not a myth. Your local banks don't mean squat, if most of the big banks fail, the small banks won't last long.

I'm a fiscal conservative, so fundamentally, I don't believe in bailouts like this. But this is a no-brainer, they are only doing the job they were hired to do. Unfortunately, they gov't didn't learn from the S&L bailout almost 30 years ago, hopefully they'll learn from this.

[JustRalph]

Pandy, we may have a depression anyway.

You mean you would get your wish?

[Secretariat]

This decision is not made by Bush, or anyone else but the guys who were APPOINTED to this position, and they know a lot more about the economy than you do. They went to Congress and said do this or face a complete meltdown. This is not a myth. Your local banks don't mean squat, if most of the big banks fail, the small banks won't last long.

I'm a fiscal conservative, so fundamentally, I don't believe in bailouts like this. But this is a no-brainer, they are only doing the job they were hired to do. Unfortunately, they gov't didn't learn from the S&L bailout almost 30 years ago, hopefully they'll learn from this.

Of course the decision is made by Bush. He's in charge, not Paulsen. As he has said, he's the decider.

Well ,these bastions of the economy who knew so much more than I did sure got themselves into a mess. Doc Sartin used to say if an expert says it you may want ot bet the other way. Certainly, these experts who determiend risk assessment for their firms are now going to be bailed out by the taxpayers rather than accountabiltiy by theri own shareholders. That's a socialistic solution, not a capitalistic one.

Primarily this is not the goverment's fault. Primarily it is the fault of the lending companies themselves. Nobody forced these companies to make risky loans. They were given carte blanche to let the free markets work and they blew it. Now honest hard working citizens have to pay the bill for their errors. Meanwhile, there's no accountability in the legislation submitted by GW to Congress at all. It simply places the Sec. of Treasury in a Czar role with no oversight or auditing function on his actions. He's not even accountable to the judicial system. I'm not even sure bypassing the judicial system in the bill would be constitutional.

We've already bent over once for Wall St, and we bent over to 580 millions for an Iraq lie. I don't feel like trusting this admin with another 700 billion (that's the start pricetag) to spend however the Sec. of Treasury wants with no auditing.

I'm glad to hear you're a fiscal conservative. You're a rare breed anymoe. Conservatives today just seem to want to run up the debt and spend and spend. I don't agree with is a no-brainer. I think it is being presented that way. A Housing Bill was just passed at the end of July allowing for easier loans and fixed rates with mortage renegotiations. THey've given it less than two months to work before going almsot 800 BILLION in debt and socializing the financial sector. To ram something like this down our throats on this without debate is like the Iraq War all over again.

Lehman is being bought up by Barclays. AIG is bailed out, Merril is bought, Fannie's bailed out. Why do we have to take on 700 billion of bad debt? it's CEO's and investors of those companies that need to pay the price, not taxpayers.

[pandy]

"A Housing Bill was just passed at the end of July allowing for easier loans and fixed rates with mortage renegotiations. "

I don't like the Housing Bill. This will give first time home buyers a $7500 tax rebate. So once again the Feds are trying to push the market, but that's a mistake. The reason why the real estate market is dead is that home prices went up too fast and become unaffordable, therefore fewer buyers. They should not have tax incentives, they should let the real estate market adjust naturally. Once prices drop to normal levels, people will start buying homes again. My wife and I went home shopping in April of 2007 and we actually went home laughing. People were asking double what the homes were worth. We refinanced instead of buying.

[Show Me the Wire]

Looks like the hcap's favorite president once again taking a position opposite of hcap, by saying the dems are at fault for the current financial mess. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/25/fox-news-blames-democrats-financial-crisis-bill-clinton-agrees.

Clinton says this about the dems.' "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac"


Clinton's remarks reinforce the factual position I stated earlier.

[Tom]

He also threw O'Bama under the bus last night. O accused McCain of backing out of the debate because he was unprepared. Bill said he believed John was sincere in his concerns that the crisis take precedent over politics. Airhead America is having kittens over that one today......:lol::lol::lol:

[witchdoctor]

I guess he wants the truth out there to get Obama defeated so it opens up the 2012 Dem nomination for Hillary.


Just conjuncture on my part. Slick Willie wouldn't do anything like that, would he? :confused:

[Tom]

He told Larry King last night that he was going to go to Florida to work on getting the "cracker vote" for O'Bama!

[RaceBookJoe]

He told Larry King last night that he was going to go to Florida to work on getting the "cracker vote" for O'Bama!

Ritz or Saltine? rbj

[Tom]

This "cracker......"