Bush may not be to blame

[Buckeye]

for all this stuff-- and since NOBODY on this forum has proven to me that he is/was or was shown to be-- nor has anyone here described a way out. My contention is it was the SUV people (us) who are responsible. Not the banks, not the credit card companies etc. WE are the ones (who shall we say) "had a party" from since at least 1999.

The party is over. Get dressed and put on some real clothes. :)

And remember it was Palin who had the courage to say "we had complicity
in this," I'm paraphrasing here.

I want "the blame" placed where it truly belongs, something only she has done.

I watched last nights debate and to me Obama made somewhat less sense.

[Buckeye]

Pie in the Sky stuff from the Democratic Party Nominee. How bout: we borrowed we lost? Didn't hear that. Instead I heard we can get those rich guys.

Ok, let's go get em. :D We'll all be out of work or something to that effect. For god sake people took out mortgages they could not afford and bought SUVs with "an attitude" of I can do it screw you. No Government could have protected against that or prevented these realities.

[Buckeye]

the reason I usually come here is for knowledge and wisdom and that's why I'm disappointed.

Stocks are WAY down and other than putting money under the matress, how do you see this playing out?

[HUSKER55]

This crap is mad made and I guarantee you that there is a way out. Those pricks on wall street and in DC just stole 700 billion dollars.. Do you really believe they won't do it again?

As long as there is crime and no punishment they will continue to do what they are doing now. Obama is winning because he is their puppet. It will happen again.

Follow the money. Look who Obama's advisors are. Can you connect the dots?

[highnote]

Follow the money. Look who Obama's advisors are. Can you connect the dots?

There are plenty of politicians in Washington who have been around a lot longer than Obama. I believe McCain has a cadre of advisors that is stacked with Fannie and Freddie lobbyists.

The whole notion of deregulation began with Reagan.

This financial meltdown is a good example why regulation is needed. Maybe not everywhere in every circumstance. But Fannie and Freddie should have had tighter government regulation for years. They didn't grow large overnight.


For 6 years the Bush admin had a majority in the House and Senate. Why wasn't something done to prevent this meltdown then? They had the ability to do so. Maybe they should have paid less attention to their lobbyists.

[NoDayJob]

Stocks are WAY down and other than putting money under the matress, how do you see this playing out?

Financial debacles are caused by a country's currency being decoupled
from any tangible store of value and the detachment of bank lending from
reserve requirements. The ensuing credit inflation allows loans that ignore
the recipient's ability to repay and bond ratings that are disconnected from
reality. This has gone on for decades now and we'll all pay the piper with
more government intervention, higher taxes and a lower standard of living.
The ensuing deflation will ultimately lead to depression. No amount of
government bailout will have any effect, except to exacerbate the deflation
and depression.

[Buckeye]

Financial debacles are caused by a country's currency being decoupled
from any tangible store of value and the detachment of bank lending from
reserve requirements. The ensuing credit inflation allows loans that ignore
the recipient's ability to repay and bond ratings that are disconnected from
reality. This has gone on for decades now and we'll all pay the piper with
more government intervention, higher taxes and a lower standard of living.
The ensuing deflation will ultimately lead to depression. No amount of
government bailout will have any effect, except to exacerbate the deflation
and depression.

You're speaking optimistically of course . . . :)

Only point I'd make is IF we go down-- EVERYBODY else does too! Not disagreeing with your analysis or conclusions. Didn't I argue against these kind of "excesses" repeatedly over the past two years?

It will ultimately come down to the tough getting going again (look up our history) and bet against it if you dare.

[LottaKash]

[QUOTE=Buckeye]
And remember it was Palin who had the courage to say "we had complicity
in this," I'm paraphrasing here. [QUOTE]


Yes, Bush and the Gangster Banksters are all ok, and Palin is ok, so please lock me up....I DID IT !.....:eek:

With all due respect Buckeye, what brand of smokes are you puffing on, I want some........:jump:

best,

[delayjf]

For 6 years the Bush admin had a majority in the House and Senate. Why wasn't something done to prevent this meltdown then? They had the ability to do so. Maybe they should have paid less attention to their lobbyists.
I do not know the answer to the above, but they did not enjoy a filabuster proof majority, so if the Dems wanted to stall any action, they could have. Bush did call for reform in 03, but was rebuffed by the Dems in Congress.

[slewis]

There are plenty of politicians in Washington who have been around a lot longer than Obama. I believe McCain has a cadre of advisors that is stacked with Fannie and Freddie lobbyists.

The whole notion of deregulation began with Reagan.

This financial meltdown is a good example why regulation is needed. Maybe not everywhere in every circumstance. But Fannie and Freddie should have had tighter government regulation for years. They didn't grow large overnight.


For 6 years the Bush admin had a majority in the House and Senate. Why wasn't something done to prevent this meltdown then? They had the ability to do so. Maybe they should have paid less attention to their lobbyists.

:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: good post...If everyone on here.. and in the country for that matter... would stop being so partisan, we stand a chance of getting the USA back where it once was, until then... everyone suffers.

[LottaKash]

:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: good post...If everyone on here.. and in the country for that matter... would stop being so partisan, we stand a chance of getting the USA back where it once was, until then... everyone suffers.

Wonderful notion Slewis, but it think it is a bit too late, the wheels of the New World Order are already rollin', and there is nothing or no one that can stop it now... I believe this is just the beginning of something brand new that is about to happen to this country as well as the world at large............:eek:

This presidential election and it's candidates, I believe are irrelevant at this point..

best,

[Tom]

:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: good post...If everyone on here.. and in the country for that matter... would stop being so partisan, we stand a chance of getting the USA back where it once was, until then... everyone suffers.\

How do we get it back with the total jerks they give us to vote on?
Last three elections have given us 5 extremely poor choices.
Term limits are the only hope - you cannot have good government with professional politicians. congress is infested with vermin. How can you not be partisan with gargage in office? Your only hope is to destroy the worst of them, by whatever means possible. When crud like Murtha call our troops murderers, then call his own constituents racists, the glove come off. You cannot accept people this low on the food chain. You cheapen your values to accept any of theirs. In other countries, people like this would taken out an shot.

[lamboguy]

let me give you an example. you own a house that has a large tree with branches. one of the branches comes off the tree during a storm and a mailman happens to be walking towards your house and the branch falls on the mailman, and he breaks his leg. you the property owner is the responsible party. even though that tree has been on your property for over 100 years.

same thing with bush, he is the president of record

[boxcar]

let me give you an example. you own a house that has a large tree with branches. one of the branches comes off the tree during a storm and a mailman happens to be walking towards your house and the branch falls on the mailman, and he breaks his leg. you the property owner is the responsible party. even though that tree has been on your property for over 100 years.

same thing with bush, he is the president of record

With all due respect, your analogy falls flat because the "property owner" in the WH is very limited by Congress in what he can do. If Congress doesn't approve of the tree cutting or pruning, then there's nothing a president can do.

Moreover, you really don't get it, do you? Bush wanted to reform the FMs but the Dems in Congress wouldn't let him. After all, you must remember another fact: It was the Clinton Administration in '99 who started this debacle because in his version of reality he thought everyone had a [civil] right to home ownership! Is it any wonder that Bush couldn't get the support of the Dems? (Did you not read that NY Times piece that posted here recently?) I'm always amazed at how people tend to think that current crises turn on a dime when in fact more often than not they are precipitated by a series of events -- sometimes in the distant past to boot. (Ever hear of the domino effect?)

Boxcar

[wes]

ASSES FROM REPUBLICAN OFFICES.



It's called AFRO economics? When you get all the jump ship turd heads from Bush administration mixed in with Obama and Biden it will be more the same BUSH crap, only worse.

ASSES FROM REPUBLICAN OFFICES.

WES

[Buckeye]

"something brand new . . . is about to happen to this country as well as the world at large............ "

Gee, I just said that! and notice you included "the World at large" -- and as a matter of fact we still own that.

No buyers out there either.

[ddog]

I do not know the answer to the above, but they did not enjoy a filabuster proof majority, so if the Dems wanted to stall any action, they could have. Bush did call for reform in 03, but was rebuffed by the Dems in Congress.



bhwaaaaaahhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


the answer is it was a scam a sham a fim flam and you bought it , seems you still do.

You think all the chamber of commerce and homebuilder and construction companies are all DIMS, really???

You didn't see where his own WH put out in 04 a policy that directly contradicted the "i coulda done it but those mean old Dims might have stopped me"??


They didn't believe in regulation and didn't make any effort to push it at all.
The only thing they wanted to do was try to get their boys to the front of the lobby/cash line, that's all it was about.

[Buckeye]

and it's called "reality" so get used to it :)

No God and no wishfull thinking "I have a plan" to punish the rich will have any effect. The Markets are speaking loudly about diminished values . . .

Broken glass.

Complicity is everywhere and most ESPECIALLY with those denying any-- who got caught with there pants down.

[Buckeye]

Should we "regulate" the risk the lenders took? Then nobody would lend to anyone. Which by the way is what's happening right now. Lesson learned.

I repeat, the lesson has already been learned (I hope).

[Buckeye]

I'd love to know of a lender who's not "predatory"

and when they don't get paided back it seems logical they will think twice the next time. Government stepping in to regulate how and whom lender A operates will not help. Lender A knows the score painfully, no need to pile on.