Wynn Slams Obama

Christa - posted on 07/19/2011 ( 75 moms have responded )

3,876

14

209

This is Steve Wynn, the CEO of Wynn Resorts, and his opinion of why our economy has stalled. He's an admitted Democrat and Harry Reid supporter. This is exactly what I was saying about the regulations and healthcare bill stifling our economy. And who would know about these things better then a man at the head of a very large and rich corporation. Thoughts?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2...

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Krista - posted on 07/19/2011

12,562

16

842

So let me get this straight. A guy whose company earned $122 million in the past quarter, and who goes on a 400-word soliloquy against Obama, AND whose entire business model is based on ripping people off, is suddenly a wise sage?

Something to keep in mind is that Steve Wynn has been spending much of the past 10 years in China, trying to get casinos established there. So even if Obama caved and didn't tax him at ALL, only a fool would believe that Wynn would create American jobs out of it. This guy is driven solely by profits, and will happily set up shop in Macau where he can pay his workers 1/100th of what they make in America.

If the American economy is stifled, it's because Wall Street and deregulation caused the economic collapse that has cost so many people their jobs. People aren't going to go spend money at Wynn's casinos if they can barely make ends meet and hear rumours of yet more layoffs at their workplace.

Karla - posted on 07/25/2011

1,555

48

87

To all:
The reason Obama didn’t make a deal to raise taxes on those making over $250,000 in his first 2 years, is that he compromised with the Republicans on a needed extension on unemployment benefits. That was give and take.

The compromises on the Affordable Health Care Act of 2010 were done in the House and Senate as several different renditions were considered well before it come up for a vote. Many Republicans supported such legislation in the past, but decided not to vote for the AHCA – (I call that Politicians protecting themselves from the criticisms of wing-nut media) If you read this and don’t believe me, then your news source is slanted.

Wing-nut media dubbed the AHCA “Obama-care” and called it a “Government takeover of healthcare,” and they were wrong and just trying to protect assets belonging to themselves and their friends. I’m not their friend, I know the Insurance companies abuse their position, and I’m all for regulations regarding insurance, and the ability for everyone to get reasonably priced healthcare.

If you never had to consider whether or not you could afford to go to the doctor or dentist (which isn’t even a feature of AHCA) then I cannot respect your opinion on The Affordable Healthcare Act.

I think Steve Wynn is afraid of the economy, and he probably should be, but when he says he fears Obama’s policies he is misdirecting the blame.

Karla - posted on 07/28/2011

1,555

48

87

Sorry this is so freakishly long, but I’m debating a “Conservative.” (& edit for grammar & spelling)



Hi Christa and anyone else who is interested,

“For the record I’m not 100% blaming the consumer I just think they deserve part of it as well.“ Not to worry, they have been punished. Your complete and utter lack of sympathy is disheartening to me.

http://www.mybudget360.com/income-budget...



“If that had been regulated they would have to keep their bad debts and no bank wants bad debts because they lose money and we all know banks are out to make money so they wouldn’t have loaned to these people that couldn’t pay them back.” No, if they had been regulated they would not have made the bad debts in the first place.



“Karla, raising taxes has NOTHING to do with whether or not a person supports the troops. We have plenty of money to pay for the things we need. The problem is the left and right have different opinions on what we need. I assume your statement means you’d cut the military first, so who doesn’t care about the troops??” Such bullshit I have never heard. Okay, yeah, we’ll just keep borrowing from China for all our military needs. Yup, that is a very patriotic approach. Actually Christa, I totally disagree with you and Obama has increased pay, housing and military/VA hospital budgets.



“I made the numbers up, but many of the loans were that absurd.”

Bahahahahaha! … Sorry, I got caught off guard.



“I’m not sure again about your point on the middle class. We have a jobs problem, given. “My bad, I thought I made it clear. Falling middle class = declining economy! Falling middle class = less tax revenue! Double bang: on the Federal debt + the public debt = economic crisis.



“So he’s had 2.5 years with these problems” It took Bush 8 years, and the housing market… what like 20 years, and the falling middle class about 28 years to get us where we were in 2008, and you think the President should fix it in 2 years? I cannot even argue that because it is illogical.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_...

http://www.recovery.gov/News/featured/Pa...



“The banking crisis has tapered off, but now we have banks sitting on money that they will not loan out because things are too uncertain” That is a self-fulfilling prophesy – Banks won’t lend for fear of the economy thus creating a weaker economy. The intention of the bailout was that the banks would circulate that money, so I guess it was futile of Bush and Obama to arrange that bailout? Maybe. Oh, yeah, but somehow Bank executives are still getting record breaking bonuses; no more regulation needed there. (sarcasm) http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/b...



“…we have regulated the Oil companies and stopped most domestic drilling and gas prices have sky rocketed stalling the economy further,” Your gonna have to fill me in on this, I don’t recall much new regulation on Oil companies and “stopped most domestic drilling” um, no, you’ll have to cite some facts on that as well. I know they re-started deep sea drilling in the Gulf as well.



“the middle class is still failing and so is the housing market.” This is a huge problem. I’ll be amazed if any President or legislator can do anything to remedy this.



“And let’s add he has spent more to “fix” these problems than any other president” That “fix” was started by Bush and handed off to Obama, that was a bi-partisan effort, so how that applies to your argument that “Obama is scary” and “the worst President” I don’t get.



“accelerating our already out of control debt” true, but then it was to save our economy, which almost everyone agreed was necessary.



“…where we cannot pay our debts leaving us looking like Greece.” – You may not like Jenny, but ***what she said!*** From Jenny, “It is much different than Greece; they have the EU to deal with. It is simply not comparable. The spending was a bipartisan effort put in motion when W. was still in office. McCain and Obama were both attending meetings to work out the details while still on the campaign trail. It is pure horseshit to put that squarely on Obama’s shoulders.”



“without EVER offering an plan of his own.” – It’s Congresses job to formulate this plan, Obama would have just increased the debt ceiling – that’s his plan. He wants to address all these other issues with his budget, and that is what he needs to do.



“He is the WORST president in history simply because he cannot and does not lead.” Okay, on the one hand you say he’s “jamming this *insert legislation* down our throats, and on the other you say he “does not lead.” Sorry, it can’t be both. He’s leading in a way that makes you uncomfortable. He’s truly and definitely not trying to get his way 100% of the time, he knows he couldn’t. He compromises which may not make everyone satisfied, but it does attempt to address our differing ideologies.



Obama recently addressed a round table of Republican, Democratic and Independent College students, he said: "If you're only talking to people you agree with, then politics is always going to disappoint you."

He adds:

"... but I think what it has to do with is this sense of ‘we have a position and we can't compromise on it.’ One of the challenges of this generation is, I think, to understand that the nature of our democracy and the nature of our politics is to marry principle to a political process, that means you don't to get 100% of what you want. You don't get it if you're in the majority, you don't get it if you're in the minority, and you can be honorable in politics understanding you're not going to get 100% of what you want."



Just because you (Christa) “admit it,” doesn’t mean “the right has admitted their mistakes.” When and where has this happened?



“but we are proposing some serious changes that would help get our country back on track.” Please make these serious changes through the budget, and less porkbarrel spending, etc. not through the debt ceiling.



“We are the only ones that seem to understand the severity of this situation.” Your “Right” is not so right, and not the only ones who understand. See Barabara Boxer’s House speech about the deficit and a balanced budget: “I hate to break it to my Republican friends, but that is the Democratic Party. We are the ones who did it. We did it when Bill Clinton came into office. We did it after hard work. We did it after painful cuts. We did it with smart investments. We did it with everybody paying their fair share, and we didn’t need a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution to do it. It is a gimmick. We need a balanced budget, not a balanced budget amendment.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/s...



“The left makes snide comments about how we don’t care about the poor and want to throw granny off a cliff, when in reality if we stay on course the poor and granny will be thrown of the cliff by the left who have made promises they knew damn well they couldn’t keep. SS, medicare and Medicaid are not sustainable on their current paths and news flash WE, people your and my age, are the ones who will have nothing when we get old. The GOP is the ONLY ones attempting to correct that. Open your eyes people, the writing is on the wall.”



You just gave me a heart attack. Okay so, better that we throw granny off the cliff then all of us going off the cliff, I get your plan, but Obama and the democrats are saying there are other options. One, cut loop-holes and tax breaks (perhaps make a bridge so no one falls off the cliff?) two, cut expenditures in other places such as subsidies for corporate America (taking us on a different path than the one that leads off the cliff.)

You think the left has their eyes shut? No, the eyes are wide open. But the path the right wants to take where *someone* goes off the cliff, isn’t the path I want to follow with my eyes wide open; I see another path.

Krista - posted on 07/19/2011

12,562

16

842

@Christa: You're all over the place with regards to deregulation. On one hand, you seem to be saying that deregulation is a bad thing, and then you turn around and say that increased regulations are hurting workers.



Do you know what you get when you have lenient regulations on big businesses? You get things like the BP oil spill.



Yes, regulations do make it a bit more expensive for companies to do business. I will grant you that. However, this corporations have proven time and time again that they CANNOT be trusted to regulate themselves. They are simply too profit-motivated, and will happily cut corners if they can get away with it.



Nor can we trust the free market to regulate businesses -- it's not as though the average consumer can go into the production facility and inspect their safety records or examine what kinds of toxic materials are being used. And the average consumer can't examine the records of your country's entire lending industry to see if it is engaging in risky, speculative mortgage lending. That whole sub-prime mess? That's all because your banking industry was not regulated properly, due to this pathological conservative phobia of (Oh NOES!) impeding profits.



When you cut regulations, in an effort to placate big business, you wind up with your businesses producing cheap, unsafe shit and treating their workers poorly. Is that really what you want for your country?

Jenny - posted on 07/19/2011

4,426

16

126

Which model indeed? What sort of major changes would you like to see?

You mean like the pre-Bush tax cut era when the nation was prosperous? Correct me if I'm wrong but are the US taxes for rich people the lowest they have ever been? Why aren't the blessed job creators trickling that down?

We live in a global economy now with corporations having more economic clout than nations. The old days are GONE, isolation is no longer an option. We're playing a whole new ballgame and need to catch up. We need to look to the future, not the past. New ideas are necessary now.

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

75 Comments

View replies by

Karla - posted on 01/07/2012

1,555

48

87

I heard this report and thought of this thread, it seems relevant so if you have 4 1/2 minutes you might want to listen to this one:

Karla - posted on 07/30/2011

1,555

48

87

Please excuse the length of this post, but I hope you enjoy it and agree with me, especially you Christa! ;-)

Oh, and Krista, thanks for the directions on italics. (I hope I did it correctly.)



“I never said I don’t have sympathy,”

You didn’t have to say it; it shows with your words. And individuals weren’t bailed out per se.



“Correct, if they had been regulated on the back side so they had to live with their bad debts they wouldn’t have made them.”

I’m not sure what “regulated on the backside” means, but if it means if they had been regulated previous… then I must say they were and both the Republicans and Democrats deregulated them. (Is that what you mean?) (a.k.a. deregulation ruined us.)



“I’m sorry this confuses me a little, I’m not sure what your Obama comment has to do with anything. The point I was making that obviously went over your head is we have enough money to pay for the military (though we do need to make some cuts here, like everywhere else). By you assuming that not raising taxes would hurt the military that means they are the last to be paid on your list, therefore you must not be patriotic according to your original statement”



LOL, no I stood up just in time and my head caught your meaning. My Obama comment had to do with something I did not quote you on, you said, “ I assume your statement means you’d cut the military first, so who doesn’t care about the troops??” So, I said the current administration has been supporting the troops.

I should have said, that is a wrong assumption. I agree there should be spending cuts, but I disagree as to where they should be. I’m thinking corporate subsidies would be a great place to begin. (see, NOT the military)

We have enough money to pay for some of the stuff we are committed too. You want it all to go to the military; that is quit different then actually *having* enough for the military.

Streamlining in government is always a good thing and always needed. (see the youtube video I shared in the Debt thread.) And we need more revenues… it might help a little.





“I made the numbers up, but many of the loans were that absurd.”

Bahahahahaha! … Sorry, I got caught off guard.

“I’m not sure why this is funny, I made up numbers for illustrative purposes, I don’t have an actual sub-prime loan in front of me sorry.”


lol). Really Christa? It’s funny because anyone can make up exaggerated scenarios, but that won’t illustrate the real problems. I also found it hilarious that you might have thought I did not know those numbers where pulled out of a hat. On the other hand, thanks for being honest.



On the falling middle class:

“What does that have to do with what Wynn said? That’s why I’m confused.”

The thread had gone in the direction of what caused the economic crisis of 2008, I was illustrating another area that people tend to forget. It has to do with Wynn in that his investments are in Vegas and in Casinos – the less the middle class can spend, the more it hurts him. His complaint about Obama is misdirected. (that’s my position in this debate.)



On Obama and the economy:

“I don’t expect him to be a miracle worker, but things are definitely not better than they were in 2008.”



Most economists judge the economy on the stock market, and by that measure, things are improving, a lot actually. I’ll admit it’s not as good as people had hoped, but I think that’s to be expected. The nature of an economic crisis is that unemployment displays with a ripple effect. I really think it would have been better had the banks used the bailout to actually loan money to small businesses that needed it. (!)



“They are not loaning, NOT because they are afraid of the weak economy, it’s because they are afraid the uncertainty that Obama and his regulation happy administration will bring.”

Our government bailed out those banks and now they decide to just sit on the money… that is wrong. I don’t care why they are doing it THAT was NOT the purpose of the bailout. Additionally, on page one of this thread I linked a poll of businessmen who said the major reason their businesses were not growing was because of lack of demand, and not (as Wynn says) because of fear. (I don’t care how many times you say this one man knows it all, I disagree and I have other businessmen to back me up.)



Thanks for the links on Oil regulation, did any of that actually pass?



Concerning housing market:

“So your answer is they will just fail forever so you can’t blame BO for this??”

Nope, that’s not my answer. (Moreover, I think you will always blame Obama.)

I think you can blame the legislators for a lot of things, but solving the problem is the difficult part. I don’t know how you solve the problem of a falling middle class, and a failing housing industry. I think I inferenced that though.



T.A.R.P. and the Bailout plans. – whatever, most people agreed it needed to be done regardless of the government expense.



Greece – http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...

This link explains the difference well, I’m not going to attempt it, and it’s too exhausting.

Bottom line: In the EU One country can't just suddenly start making more euros than the others. (to cover their deficit.) Also, the US stock market is now stable (as long as this debt ceiling thing doesn’t explode on us.) It’s a fact, so don’t go yelling about it. Just, please, read the article.



“It is congresses job to write the legislation, Presidents past have been able to lay out an outline for congress to follow.”


First, that’s what I said, it’s congresses job, and second, neither of us knows what was said in the closed door sessions, so it’s a great assumption to say he had no layout for a plan.



I cannot fight your opinion of Obama being the worst President; I can only disagree with you. On the AHA: until today I don’t believe I’ve ever heard anyone say it was Reid and Pelosi who “shoved it down our throats.” So, nice spin there. Okay, Obama had nothing to do with “Obamacare” as the Right wing loves to call it.



“Where has he compromised? I know you say the HC bill and stimulus but we’ve been over the voting records. The only thing I’ll say he compromised on was the budget extension to avoid the government shutdown and on this debt ceiling he will eventually have to compromise, but that’s because he’s forced to now. Where was this compromising spirit when he had control of both houses? If it actually existed the right wouldn’t feel so negatively for him and his approval ratings wouldn’t be plummeting.”



The voting records don’t reflect the past Republican public servants’ support of such plans.

I think I’d rather you show me where Obama has not compromised. I’m sure you are right, he is forced to compromise more now than in his first few months in office, but then he had the filibuster to contend with. That’s politics in the aughts for ya.



You may be right, maybe the right is mad at Obama because of the first 2 years, but I do not agree. I’ve been around long enough to see the detrimental effects of political extremist media. Today that media is very strong, and almost every politician is afraid to be called-out by those extreme wing-nuts. If the right compromises with the president, the right wing-nut media will squash them like a little bug.



“I think the Tea Party is proof that many on the right have admitted the mistakes of Bush his GOP congress. Don’t you think??”

The tea party should be their own party, they are much more Right then most GOP members. You’re not going to like this, but I think the tea party is proof that right wing talking points stir people up. the Right's wording “Government takeover of healthcare” was a farce, a talking point that explained nothing but created an emotional response therefore helping create the tea party. Not raising the debt ceiling is the result. It was a grave mistake for the GOP to adopt the tea party to get votes for them selves. (That would be like the DNC adopting the GreenParty.)



“I agree, but last time I checked they haven’t passed a budget in 2 years (and they had control of both houses). The debt ceiling is forcing the issue, because passing a budget clearly hasn’t.”



The 2011 budget was enacted on April 15, 2011, as Public Law 112-10. (6 months past due)

Obama is currently working on the 2012 Budget; I’m guessing the deadline is September 30.



“Ummm, the GOP controlled congress from 1994 to 2000

How do the Dem’s take sole credit for Clinton’s success?? Clearly, like I said before, Clinton was able to work with his GOP counterparts. BO should take notes”




Did you read Boxer’s speech, it’s pretty good. (I could give a flying monkey about who balanced the budget, I’m just glad they did, and if Bush could have maintained it in any way, shape, or form, I probably would still claim myself an Independent!)



My point was that it can be done, they have to work together to do it. It’s going to be harder than when Clinton balanced the budget because of the economic crisis and the huge deficit and debt.



“Again that’s just bullshit rhetoric. The GOP doesn’t want to throw ANYONE off a cliff which is why they want to reform entitlements now so they are still here for future generations. Ryan’s budget doesn’t affect anyone over the age of 55, period. NOBODY is throwing granny off a cliff. The left wants people to think that so they won’t support it. If people would actually take a moment and really look at what Ryan has proposed they will see he’s saving it.”



You are right, it is bullshit rhetoric, come on now, smile a little, I gotcha!

Here’s what I don’t’ like about the “it won’t affect anyone over 55” thing. It will affect everyone who is 54 or younger. So what the heck? You wanna throw me off a cliff? (don’t answer that.) As I said in my earlier post, I think there are other ways to deal with it, I think Ryan’s plan is extreme. (And the right called the Affordable Healthcare Act a “government takeover of healthcare” to insure people wouldn’t support it. This is a two way street.) I heard a report that Ryan’s plan would cost more then Obama’s, but I’m not sure and I’m too tired to look it up now. (I do believe the CBO is still analyzing Ryan’s plan.)



“The dems would like to just keep you dumb and blind until it’s too late.”



Really? You just called me dumb and blind? Do you really think I’m dumb? Do you really think I’m blind?

I have a different way of seeing the world than you, and it is quite clear to me; I am very sure of my view. There can be different approaches, and the “my way or the highway” attitude that the current Republicans stand by does not work in a diverse society and government.

Karla - posted on 07/29/2011

1,555

48

87

“I will say I'm sad to see you go to such a disrespectful place with your comments”
@Christa, no, I'm sure you called me out on it before. ;-)
You once told me in the “pretend I’m a moderate” thread that I had attacked you, I assured you and I think I proved that I had not.

Dana - posted on 07/29/2011

11,264

35

489

bold

As Krista explained when you italicize. Same thing but, type in the word, strong. So, it would be (strong)word(/strong). Again using < > instead of ( )

Christa - posted on 07/29/2011

3,876

14

209

I agree with you Krista. They should have been allowed to fail and they would have learned. It is a shame they got off without a scratch, but what would you do? What I think the left doesn't seem to understand is that trying to punish the top trickles down to the consumer. More taxes=pushed to the consumer as prices and fees, stricter regulations=less jobs, try and minimize profits= less jobs and lower salaries. Squeezing the top just gets pushed down to the bottom. If these people are greedy they will still be greedy.

Krista - posted on 07/29/2011

12,562

16

842

Karla: “For the record I’m not 100% blaming the consumer I just think they deserve part of it as well.“ “Not to worry, they have been punished. Your complete and utter lack of sympathy is disheartening to me.”

I never said I don’t have sympathy, I just don’t believe in bailing people out for poor choices. We all must learn from our mistakes, it’s the only way people grow.


So, um...

What has the financial industry learned?

Call me crazy, but it appears to me that even if the consumers DO bear a part of the responsibility, they've have also borne MUCH more than their share of the fallout. These people have been utterly ruined.

So what happened to the bank executives? What happened to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? What happened to the Wall Street hotshots?

The way I see it, they bear MOST of the responsibility for this mess. And yet those bastards are still hauling home six-figure bonuses. They haven't learned a blessed thing, and they still won't, because NOBODY's going to clamp down on them, because that might - Oh NOES! - be seen as nanny-state regulation, stifling the beautifully manicured and glistening hand of the free market.

Christa - posted on 07/29/2011

3,876

14

209

Thanks Krista!! I blockquoted my responses and deleted Karla's links because it was too confusing as to which link went with what point. Hopefully that can be followed, even though it's a small novel. :)

Krista - posted on 07/29/2011

12,562

16

842

w00t! We have colour, ladies. So THAT's one way to break down huge chunks of dialogue, no?


(p style="color:#FF0080")Your text here(/p)


Your text here



Sweet....

Krista - posted on 07/29/2011

12,562

16

842

We USED to be able to do blockquote, but I don't think it works anymore.

You think the left has their eyes shut? No, the eyes are wide open. But the path the right wants to take where *someone* goes off the cliff, isn’t the path I want to follow with my eyes wide open; I see another path.




Your text here





Testing, testing....





Edit: Cool. Blockquote does still sort of work. So what you would do is paste what you want to quote, and then instead of putting (em) (/em) around it, you'd replace "em" with "blockquote". Just don't forget to use instead of ()

Krista - posted on 07/29/2011

12,562

16

842

I don't know how to bold stuff, but I will italicize quotations AND put quote marks around them, and that tends to help.

To italicize my name, for example, I would write (em)Krista(/em), but instead of parentheses, you use < >.

So let's say I was addressing Karla's quote. To make it easier, I'd format it thusly:
______________________________________
"You think the left has their eyes shut? No, the eyes are wide open. But the path the right wants to take where *someone* goes off the cliff, isn’t the path I want to follow with my eyes wide open; I see another path."

Karla, you would think that these people have never heard of OnStar.
________________________________________________


Of course, considering the length of the dialogue between you and Karla, it's going to be a bit of a job to read it no matter what.

Christa - posted on 07/29/2011

3,876

14

209

Ok somebody help me, how can I make that easier to read? How can I bold my responses?? That's too hard to read that way.

Christa - posted on 07/29/2011

3,876

14

209

Ok I hope this can be followed, I don’t know how to get fancy with the fonts to make it easier to read.



“For the record I’m not 100% blaming the consumer I just think they deserve part of it as well.“ “Not to worry, they have been punished. Your complete and utter lack of sympathy is disheartening to me.”

I never said I don’t have sympathy, I just don’t believe in bailing people out for poor choices. We all must learn from our mistakes, it’s the only way people grow.






“If that had been regulated they would have to keep their bad debts and no bank wants bad debts because they lose money and we all know banks are out to make money so they wouldn’t have loaned to these people that couldn’t pay them back.”
No, if they had been regulated they would not have made the bad debts in the first place. Correct, if they had been regulated on the back side so they had to live with their bad debts they wouldn’t have made them.




“Karla, raising taxes has NOTHING to do with whether or not a person supports the troops. We have plenty of money to pay for the things we need. The problem is the left and right have different opinions on what we need. I assume your statement means you’d cut the military first, so who doesn’t care about the troops??” Such bullshit I have never heard. Okay, yeah, we’ll just keep borrowing from China for all our military needs. Yup, that is a very patriotic approach. Actually Christa, I totally disagree with you and Obama has increased pay, housing and military/VA hospital budgets.
I’m sorry this confuses me a little, I’m not sure what your Obama comment has to do with anything. The point I was making that obviously went over your head is we have enough money to pay for the military (though we do need to make some cuts here, like everywhere else). By you assuming that not raising taxes would hurt the military that means they are the last to be paid on your list, therefore you must not be patriotic according to your original statement.




“I made the numbers up, but many of the loans were that absurd.”

Bahahahahaha! … Sorry, I got caught off guard.
I’m not sure why this is funny, I made up numbers for illustrative purposes, I don’t have an actual sub-prime loan in front of me sorry.




“I’m not sure again about your point on the middle class. We have a jobs problem, given. “My bad, I thought I made it clear. Falling middle class = declining economy! Falling middle class = less tax revenue! Double bang: on the Federal debt + the public debt = economic crisis.
Yeah again, given. What does that have to do with what Wynn said? That’s why I’m confused. I’m not arguing that the middle class is thriving, I think we all agree they are in trouble though have different reasons as how to fix that.




“So he’s had 2.5 years with these problems” It took Bush 8 years, and the housing market… what like 20 years, and the falling middle class about 28 years to get us where we were in 2008, and you think the President should fix it in 2 years? I cannot even argue that because it is illogical.

Why is it illogical? I don’t expect him to be a miracle worker, but things are definitely not better than they were in 2008. I can’t find an article right now with the numbers, but unemployment is worse, gas prices are higher, growth is anemic. We grew .4% in Q1 and the numbers just came out for Q2 at 1.3%.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/29/news/eco...



“The banking crisis has tapered off, but now we have banks sitting on money that they will not loan out because things are too uncertain” That is a self-fulfilling prophesy – Banks won’t lend for fear of the economy thus creating a weaker economy. The intention of the bailout was that the banks would circulate that money, so I guess it was futile of Bush and Obama to arrange that bailout? Maybe. Oh, yeah, but somehow Bank executives are still getting record breaking bonuses; no more regulation needed there. (sarcasm)

They are not loaning, NOT because they are afraid of the weak economy, it’s because they are afraid the uncertainty that Obama and his regulation happy administration will bring. That’s what the OP is about in case you forgot.




“…we have regulated the Oil companies and stopped most domestic drilling and gas prices have sky rocketed stalling the economy further,” Your gonna have to fill me in on this, I don’t recall much new regulation on Oil companies and “stopped most domestic drilling” um, no, you’ll have to cite some facts on that as well. I know they re-started deep sea drilling in the Gulf as well.
Here’s some facts for you.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/belt...
Here he suddenly feels the pressure and reverse course a bit
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-14/polit...







“the middle class is still failing and so is the housing market.” This is a huge problem. I’ll be amazed if any President or legislator can do anything to remedy this.
So your answer is they will just fail forever so you can’t blame BO for this??




“And let’s add he has spent more to “fix” these problems than any other president” That “fix” was started by Bush and handed off to Obama, that was a bi-partisan effort, so how that applies to your argument that “Obama is scary” and “the worst President” I don’t get.
Only TARP was bi-partisan and started by Bush and it’s returned a profit.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gr...
Please get your facts straight.




“accelerating our already out of control debt” true, but then it was to save our economy, which almost everyone agreed was necessary.
Everyone agreed something should be done, but the GOP bill had less spending and it hasn’t really saved the economy.




“…where we cannot pay our debts leaving us looking like Greece.” – You may not like Jenny, but ***what she said!*** From Jenny, “It is much different than Greece; they have the EU to deal with. It is simply not comparable. The spending was a bipartisan effort put in motion when W. was still in office. McCain and Obama were both attending meetings to work out the details while still on the campaign trail. It is pure horseshit to put that squarely on Obama’s shoulders.”
Again, why I didn’t answer it when Jenny posted it, it is completely wrong. TARP was Bush and it’s turned a profit. See last link. Also it’s not any different the Greece. Greece is at a point where they can’t pay their bills and people don’t want to loan them anymore money because they can’t pay what they already own. So they are being forced to pass severe austerity packages that will pull the rug out from under many citizens who need the money they receive from the government and will kill the little economy they have now. If we don’t fix our problems we will be in this same position. Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain are behind Greece and we are closely behind them. Parts of Spain just got their credit ratings downgraded today. Wake up folks, we are on the same path as them.




“without EVER offering an plan of his own.” – It’s Congresses job to formulate this plan, Obama would have just increased the debt ceiling – that’s his plan. He wants to address all these other issues with his budget, and that is what he needs to do.
It is congresses job to write the legislation, Presidents past have been able to lay out an outline for congress to follow. Obama NEVER talks in specifics. Did you see his speech on Monday? Where was one specific in that speech? He’s got none. Look at Clinton, I didn’t care for him at the time but comparing him to Obama makes him seem not so bad. He was able to work with his republican congress and get us a surplus. I’ve never wished Hilary had won the nomination more.




“He is the WORST president in history simply because he cannot and does not lead.” Okay, on the one hand you say he’s “jamming this *insert legislation* down our throats, and on the other you say he “does not lead.” Sorry, it can’t be both. He’s leading in a way that makes you uncomfortable. He’s truly and definitely not trying to get his way 100% of the time, he knows he couldn’t. He compromises which may not make everyone satisfied, but it does attempt to address our differing ideologies.
No he’s not leading. Pelosi and Reid did the hard work and then the three of them shoved it down America’s throats. We’ve already covered that. Again where are his ideas? His specifics?




Obama recently addressed a round table of Republican, Democratic and Independent College students, he said: "If you're only talking to people you agree with, then politics is always going to disappoint you."

He adds:

"... but I think what it has to do with is this sense of ‘we have a position and we can't compromise on it.’ One of the challenges of this generation is, I think, to understand that the nature of our democracy and the nature of our politics is to marry principle to a political process, that means you don't to get 100% of what you want. You don't get it if you're in the majority, you don't get it if you're in the minority, and you can be honorable in politics understanding you're not going to get 100% of what you want."
Where has he compromised? I know you say the HC bill and stimulus but we’ve been over the voting records. The only thing I’ll say he compromised on was the budget extension to avoid the government shutdown and on this debt ceiling he will eventually have to compromise, but that’s because he’s forced to now. Where was this compromising spirit when he had control of both houses? If it actually existed the right wouldn’t feel so negatively for him and his approval ratings wouldn’t be plummeting.




Just because you (Christa) “admit it,” doesn’t mean “the right has admitted their mistakes.” When and where has this happened?
I think the Tea Party is proof that many on the right have admitted the mistakes of Bush his GOP congress. Don’t you think??




“but we are proposing some serious changes that would help get our country back on track.” Please make these serious changes through the budget, and less porkbarrel spending, etc. not through the debt ceiling.
I agree, but last time I checked they haven’t passed a budget in 2 years (and they had control of both houses). The debt ceiling is forcing the issue, because passing a budget clearly hasn’t.




“We are the only ones that seem to understand the severity of this situation.” Your “Right” is not so right, and not the only ones who understand. See Barabara Boxer’s House speech about the deficit and a balanced budget: “I hate to break it to my Republican friends, but that is the Democratic Party. We are the ones who did it. We did it when Bill Clinton came into office. We did it after hard work. We did it after painful cuts. We did it with smart investments. We did it with everybody paying their fair share, and we didn’t need a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution to do it. It is a gimmick. We need a balanced budget, not a balanced budget amendment.”

Ummm, the GOP controlled congress from 1994 to 2000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_...
How do the Dem’s take sole credit for Clinton’s success?? Clearly, like I said before, Clinton was able to work with his GOP counterparts. BO should take notes.




“The left makes snide comments about how we don’t care about the poor and want to throw granny off a cliff, when in reality if we stay on course the poor and granny will be thrown of the cliff by the left who have made promises they knew damn well they couldn’t keep. SS, medicare and Medicaid are not sustainable on their current paths and news flash WE, people your and my age, are the ones who will have nothing when we get old. The GOP is the ONLY ones attempting to correct that. Open your eyes people, the writing is on the wall.”



You just gave me a heart attack. Okay so, better that we throw granny off the cliff then all of us going off the cliff, I get your plan, but Obama and the democrats are saying there are other options. One, cut loop-holes and tax breaks (perhaps make a bridge so no one falls off the cliff?) two, cut expenditures in other places such as subsidies for corporate America (taking us on a different path than the one that leads off the cliff.)

You think the left has their eyes shut? No, the eyes are wide open. But the path the right wants to take where *someone* goes off the cliff, isn’t the path I want to follow with my eyes wide open; I see another path.
Again that’s just bullshit rhetoric. The GOP doesn’t want to throw ANYONE off a cliff which is why they want to reform entitlements now so they are still here for future generations. Ryan’s budget doesn’t affect anyone over the age of 55, period. NOBODY is throwing granny off a cliff. The left wants people to think that so they won’t support it. If people would actually take a moment and really look at what Ryan has proposed they will see he’s saving it. The dems would like to just keep you dumb and blind until it’s too late. And what do they care?? Many of them will be dead or close to it before this happens and again it’s you and I that will suffer.




I hope that answered your questions. This took forever and I’d like to not have to do it again. :)

Christa - posted on 07/29/2011

3,876

14

209

Karla, I don't have time to thoroughly answer your post right now (I should have come in here first), but I will be back to sometime this weekend. I will say I'm sad to see you go to such a disrespectful place with your comments. So far you've been pleasant to discuss with. I hope this is not a new trend for you. Anyway I will be back when I have more time.

Karla - posted on 07/28/2011

1,555

48

87

For the record Jenny, I appreciate you perspective, and your input. Keep it coming.

Jenny - posted on 07/28/2011

4,426

16

126

Christa, I'm teasing, relax. I'll continue to respond to the relevant points as I enjoy debating. You can continue to not be able to respond to them.

Christa - posted on 07/28/2011

3,876

14

209

Jenny my responses to your post would get me flagged for a personal attack so I'm choosing to walk away. If you need to declare yourself the "winner" to make yourself feel better, go ahead. Now I'd like to get back to my conversations with Karla and Krista if that's ok with you.

Jenny - posted on 07/28/2011

4,426

16

126

You are totally running away. I took the time to go through point by point and state my case and then your response is to turn tail and run. I thought it was the left that was supposed to be the weak party? Stand up for side and reply or why even be on a debate board? If you are looking for people who see the world as you do then go to the Republican board.

Our group pic is pink boxing gloves. Guess I'm the winner due to tapout.

Christa - posted on 07/28/2011

3,876

14

209

I'm not running away, I just don't enjoy debating with you and would like to continue the conversation with the people who I've been able to have a fruitful discussion with. You know that you and I come from different planets, we have NEVER had any sort of agreement and I grow tired of your version of the world. So again with respect I think it's best if you and I go our separate ways.

Jenny - posted on 07/28/2011

4,426

16

126

For fuck sakes. Stop running away. It's a debate board, so debate. Why are you here?

Christa - posted on 07/28/2011

3,876

14

209

Jenny, with respect, you might as well be on another planet. You and I are polar opposites and there is no need for us to talk any further. We will never understand each other's point of view and I'm not going down this road with you again.

Jenny - posted on 07/28/2011

4,426

16

126

Krista, I’ve already said several times what I feel needs to be regulated. And again if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. For the record I’m not 100% blaming the consumer I just think they deserve part of it as well. I know the banks were doing bad loans for a profit and like I said the problem was the backended way they were able to get rid of them. If that had been regulated they would have to keep their bad debts and no bank wants bad debts because they lose money and we all know banks are out to make money so they wouldn’t have loaned to these people that couldn’t pay them back. That’s the last I’ll say on that.

Have you ever thought about where the money they make comes from? The pockets of the middle class. Profits are being siphoned to the top with nothing to actually back the currency up. It’s just numbers on a computer to them. I believe it should be illegal to make from money. The intent of a currency system is to put value on goods ot make them easier to trade and sustain our families.

Karla, raising taxes has NOTHING to do with whether or not a person supports the troops. We have plenty of money to pay for the things we need. The problem is the left and right have different opinions on what we need. I assume your statement means you’d cut the military first, so who doesn’t care about the troops??
Has it occurred to you that perhaps you can’t afford your bloated military? It’s time to give up the toys and feed and house your people. Think of the progress you could have if you put half the military budget into infrastructure upgrade or, better yet, green energy? Now that is a job creator.

I made the numbers up, but many of the loans were that absurd.
Well it’s easier to debate with real numbers and not made up ones. In Canada you need to prove your debt load does not exceed a certain amount of income before any loan is approved. It is very difficult to get a mortgage here to protect us from ourselves.

I’m not sure again about your point on the middle class. We have a jobs problem, given.

“Obama had to address a financial crisis: deregulated Banks and Oil industries that were running amok, a failing middle class, a failing housing market”
So he’s had 2.5 years with these problems and let’s see where we are at. . .

Two years of fighting tooth and nail from the Republicans who are committing treason by putting taking down a Presidency over the well being of their country. This has been self admitted by several on the right.
The banking crisis has tapered off, but now we have banks sitting on money that they will not loan out because things are too uncertain, we have regulated the Oil companies and stopped most domestic drilling and gas prices have sky rocketed stalling the economy further, the middle class is still failing and so is the housing market.
Don’t you have the lowest tax rates like, ever? So where’s the jobs? Again, we are seeing the things Republicans support don’t actually work when used in the real world. Our gas prices in Canada are higher than you are paying, even though we produce a huge amount, and our economy is still strong. The economy is sucking because the people don’t have access to the incomes needed to live, it is being hoarded. That is where your problems lie, you have allowed your country to become a Plutocracy. But don’t they deserve every penny? This is Capitalism in action (again, in real life it plays much different than the ideal of it), stop complaining about it or fight for a better system.
And let’s add he has spent more to “fix” these problems than any other president accelerating our already out of control debt and now we are facing the debt ceiling and more importantly a deficit that will send our debt to an unmanageable level very soon to where the debt ceiling talk will not be a political game but an actual place where we cannot pay our debts leaving us looking like Greece.
It is much different than Greece; they have the EU to deal with. It is simply not comparable. The spending was a bipartisan effort put in motion when W. was still in office. McCain and Obama were both attending meetings to work out the details while still on the campaign trail. It is pure horseshit to put that squarely on Obama’s shoulders.
And instead of doing something to make some real changes that would change the trajectory of our country he’d rather make a prime time speech blaming Bush and the current GOP members of congress for our problems without EVER offering an plan of his own.
I thought the president couldn’t offer a plan because that was Congress’ job? Or am I misunderstanding how your system works? I agree the speech sucked and I agree he has been acting weak to the right.
He is the WORST president in history simply because he cannot and does not lead. You all have expressed your dissatisfaction on the left, the right can’t stand him, he has done nothing the make our future look any brighter than it did back in 2008 and the start of this mess. He and you all can continue to make it all Bush’s and the GOP both past and presents fault, but that gets us nowhere. The right has admitted their mistakes of the past, we know we helped get us here, but we are proposing some serious changes that would help get our country back on track.
No way, W. was FAR worse. He drug the country into a ditch to appease his oil cronies and sold you out big time to the Corporations. The wars. The fight against science. The image he sent to the whole world. Obama will be shown as a fair centrist President who had more on his plate in a year than the rest of us would deal with in a lifetime and he always kept his composure and handled it the best he could.
We are the only ones that seem to understand the severity of this situation. The left makes snide comments about how we don’t care about the poor and want to throw granny off a cliff, when in reality if we stay on course the poor and granny will be thrown of the cliff by the left who have made promises they knew damn well they couldn’t keep. SS, medicare and Medicaid are not sustainable on their current paths and news flash WE, people your and my age, are the ones who will have nothing when we get old. The GOP is the ONLY ones attempting to correct that. Open your eyes people, the writing is on the wall.

Yep, you’re falling off a cliff but at least you still have all those fancy tanks and fighter jets and willing army of poor people to go take over another country when you totally kill yours off. You all go spend your time bickering with each and throwing your country under the bus. I’ll sit pretty up here with one of the strongest economies and lowest unemployment rates in the world. Yay Socialism!

Christa - posted on 07/28/2011

3,876

14

209

Krista, I’ve already said several times what I feel needs to be regulated. And again if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. For the record I’m not 100% blaming the consumer I just think they deserve part of it as well. I know the banks were doing bad loans for a profit and like I said the problem was the backended way they were able to get rid of them. If that had been regulated they would have to keep their bad debts and no bank wants bad debts because they lose money and we all know banks are out to make money so they wouldn’t have loaned to these people that couldn’t pay them back. That’s the last I’ll say on that.



Karla, raising taxes has NOTHING to do with whether or not a person supports the troops. We have plenty of money to pay for the things we need. The problem is the left and right have different opinions on what we need. I assume your statement means you’d cut the military first, so who doesn’t care about the troops??



I made the numbers up, but many of the loans were that absurd.



I’m not sure again about your point on the middle class. We have a jobs problem, given.



“Obama had to address a financial crisis: deregulated Banks and Oil industries that were running amok, a failing middle class, a failing housing market”

So he’s had 2.5 years with these problems and let’s see where we are at. . . The banking crisis has tapered off, but now we have banks sitting on money that they will not loan out because things are too uncertain, we have regulated the Oil companies and stopped most domestic drilling and gas prices have sky rocketed stalling the economy further, the middle class is still failing and so is the housing market. And let’s add he has spent more to “fix” these problems than any other president accelerating our already out of control debt and now we are facing the debt ceiling and more importantly a deficit that will send our debt to an unmanageable level very soon to where the debt ceiling talk will not be a political game but an actual place where we cannot pay our debts leaving us looking like Greece. And instead of doing something to make some real changes that would change the trajectory of our country he’d rather make a prime time speech blaming Bush and the current GOP members of congress for our problems without EVER offering an plan of his own. He is the WORST president in history simply because he cannot and does not lead. You all have expressed your dissatisfaction on the left, the right can’t stand him, he has done nothing the make our future look any brighter than it did back in 2008 and the start of this mess. He and you all can continue to make it all Bush’s and the GOP both past and presents fault, but that gets us nowhere. The right has admitted their mistakes of the past, we know we helped get us here, but we are proposing some serious changes that would help get our country back on track. We are the only ones that seem to understand the severity of this situation. The left makes snide comments about how we don’t care about the poor and want to throw granny off a cliff, when in reality if we stay on course the poor and granny will be thrown of the cliff by the left who have made promises they knew damn well they couldn’t keep. SS, medicare and Medicaid are not sustainable on their current paths and news flash WE, people your and my age, are the ones who will have nothing when we get old. The GOP is the ONLY ones attempting to correct that. Open your eyes people, the writing is on the wall.

Karla - posted on 07/27/2011

1,555

48

87

Christa, “Now they are using the collapse of our economy and credibility as a country to raise taxes making the GOP look inflexible.“ I want it noted that Bush lowered taxes during wartime, which was irresponsible. So if you don’t want the tax breaks repealed, or new taxes, or loop-holes closed, then how can you claim to support the troops, be patriotic, or love America?

@Christa, where and when could anyone have gotten a $500,000 dollar loan on a $30,000 income and end up with a $1,000 payment. It sounds like hyperbole to me. If in fact that happened once –yeah, the borrower and lender deserved what they got, aka foreclosure.

When I spoke about middle class incomes I wasn’t talking about lack of raises. I’m talking about higher paying jobs moving away from the US, I’m talking about the ripple effect that had on almost every business and industry. I’m talking about the middle class that works more and makes less than they did 15 years ago. That is NOT irresponsible, that is government miss-management on epic levels. And just as the banking industry fallout was the fault of both Dems and Repubs, so was this. Free trade is crap when you are the stronger country.

My other point with the falling middle class is that this huge population is not able to spend as much (demand based economy that I talked about), they are not putting as much toward taxes (make less money = less taxes). And they don’t go to casinos anymore, my bad, Mr Wynn. This helped kill the US economy as much as the banking/housing industry did.

From Christa, “Of course you don't want to cause SEVERE consequences and that's where the safety nets come in.” Sorry, but that is exactly what we had with the 2008 crisis – using your analogy: it wasn’t your baby bumping her head; it was your baby in the middle of the highway. Really.

Obama had to address a financial crisis: deregulated Banks and Oil industries that were running amok, a failing middle class, a failing housing market, and you’re going to claim HE’S scary? I’m just saying that’s B.S. – the scary things came before Obama. Wynn is used to having a “yes-man” president, and Obama is saying – we’ve got rules you must follow; I guess it has bewildered Wynn. You claim regulations are killing our economy; I’m saying it’s much more complicated. I’m addressing your “Wynn would know” with “No he wouldn’t.” You haven’t convinced me otherwise.

The big question now is whether or not our legislators will quit allocating money when we don’t have it. Will they create revenue? Will they raise the debt ceiling, (which Wynn did mention) which is simply approving our government paying for stuff they already granted?

Krista - posted on 07/27/2011

12,562

16

842

And the here and now shows the regulations are killing our economy.

So what is your solution, then? Obviously you can't de-regulate everything, unless you want your society to regress back to Dickens-era England. What do you feel should be regulated, and at what level?

Krista - posted on 07/27/2011

12,562

16

842

Come on if you can’t do basic math then you shouldn’t be signing a legal document that gives you hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The thing is, though, is that there are two factors at play here:

The first factor is that the banking and finance systems have become downright Byzantine in their complexity. Hell, Christa, I can do basic math and I actually used to WORK at a bank, and I don't understand half of the sub-prime lingo and terminology that was being tossed around.

Which brings me to the second factor: because it's become so complex, we've all had to rely more and more upon our own bankers to decipher it for us and to tell us what it all means.

I don't think there were too damn many people out there who KNEW that they weren't going to be able to afford those mortgages. Who would willingly put themselves through the dubious joys of foreclosure? I think that in the overwhelming majority of cases, you had a regular Joe sitting down with his banker, who then proceeded to spout all kinds of inside baseball banking lingo at him, and persuaded him that with all of this jiggery-pokery, that yes, he'd be able to afford that $250,000 mortgage, no problem!

And sadly, when you don't understand something, you tend to trust the people who DO understand it. But the bugger of it is that the bankers "on the ground" in personal banking, might not have even understood it that well themselves. (I remember on more than one occasion getting less than 10 minutes' training on a new investment product before being plunked out onto the floor and expected to sell it.) All they know is that it's a very good day when you sell a mortgage. Anybody who thinks that bankers don't have sales targets is a fool. They have targets -- and they get a LOT of pressure from on high to reach those targets.

So you've got confused but optimistic consumers, bankers who probably don't understand the system all that well, but are being made to sell the product, executives who are walking around with dollar signs in their eyes, and an American government that doesn't dare impose sensible regulations on the financial industry, because it makes people like Steve Wynn poop themselves with rage and fear.

It's a perfect storm for epic fuckery, really.

Dana - posted on 07/27/2011

11,264

35

489

***Mod warning***
Let's cut out the personal digs and the dictation of how threads should proceed. Thanks ~ Dana

Christa - posted on 07/27/2011

3,876

14

209

No we are going round and round about who's to blame for the collapse almost 3 years ago. Let's talk about the here and now. And the here and now shows the regulations are killing our economy. Which one of your "points" was the “good one” I was supposedly running from??

Jenny - posted on 07/27/2011

4,426

16

126

Oh please, you duck and run whenever confronted with a good point.

From the OP: "This is exactly what I was saying about the regulations and healthcare bill stifling our economy." And what are we talking about? Oh right, regulations or the lack thereof. So, yes, very much ON topic.

Christa - posted on 07/27/2011

3,876

14

209

Well how well is the government stepping in to pick winners and losers working out for us? It's not. Could we get back to the OP, you do have a way of going on tangents.

Jenny - posted on 07/27/2011

4,426

16

126

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. Irrelevant now. It happened and is still happening.



I'm a results based person. Leaving it in the hands of the people does not work. It has failed and will fail every time it is tried unless the population becomes less brainwashed by marketing and better educated as a whole. The citizens are a product of their environment and acted precisely as they would be expected to. Precisely as they have been conditioned to from the get go.



Go read up on it you say. Kind of hard when you can't read: "The study, a five-year, $14 million study of U.S. adult literacy involving interviews of U.S. adults, the most comprehensive study of literacy ever commissioned by the U.S. government, was released in April 2002. It involved lengthy interviews of over 90,700 adults statistically balanced for age, gender, ethnicity, education level, and location (urban, suburban, or rural) in 12 states across the U.S. and was designed to represent the U.S. population as a whole. This government study showed that 21% to 23% of adult Americans were not "able to locate information in text", could not "make low-level inferences using printed materials", and were unable to "integrate easily identifiable pieces of information." Further, this study showed that 41% to 44% of U.S. adults in the lowest level on the literacy scale are living in poverty.[2]" Source: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs93/93275.pdf



it's time to try a new approach, your idea of letting the people decide to enter high risk financial decisions doesn't work and takes everyone down with it.

Christa - posted on 07/27/2011

3,876

14

209

Come on if you can’t do basic math then you shouldn’t be signing a legal document that gives you hundreds of thousands of dollars. A 360 month loan at 1K a month does not equal 500K, that should be a red flag, it’s basic math. And if we allowed them to fail, both businesses and people they'd learn the hard way like everyone else. I bet you those people know now not to get into these loans again and they will teach their kids. I'm a believer in natural consequences, that's how we learn. If my child climbs up and bonks her head she'll learn next time not to do that. Of course you don't want to cause SEVERE consequences and that's where the safety nets come in. But if you or I make a bad deal and we lose money, well we learn. I just lost some money in the market trying to play the stocks and now I know better. Lesson learned. I'm not crying that some stock broker took advantage of me and we need more regulations. I took it upon myself to go get some books and educate myself further. How will people ever learn if we keep them in a padded bubble? When do we stop "protecting" people? And who's values get to decide? It's a slippery slope and I don't want the government telling me what I can or cannot do.

Like I said regulations need to be in place where people's safety and lives are at stake and on the backside of things where an average consumer has no knowledge of or control. If these mortgages were just normal mortgages that people had defaulted on it would not have caused this problem. The banks would have to deal with their losses and thus would stop giving them to people they knew couldn't afford them. It was the packaging them and selling them in security bundles that caused the major collapse because then they flooded the balance sheets and everyone just kept passing them along pretending like there was no problem until they could pretend no more. THAT's where the regulation was needed.

Jenny - posted on 07/27/2011

4,426

16

126

You have to regulate for stupidity or the whole goddamn system falls apart when the institutions abuse it. It just happened. Are you willing to sacrifice your country instead of putting rules in to ensure a more secure future? I find that pretty twisted. Government is just the things we decide to do together and protecting the delicate balance of the economy should be a part of that.



WHERE are these people supposed to learn the ins and outs of loans? Do they even teach that in high school? I know mine didn't and my mother never taught me either. I never really understood it until I was in university. It is FAR from basic math.



You continue to talk in ideals instead of reality. That doesn't get the country very far as evidenced by the past few years.

Christa - posted on 07/27/2011

3,876

14

209

Excuses. That's all I hear. There are people out there who want to take advantage of us for all sorts of things. It is our responsibility to educate ourselves. When you make 30K and are told you can take out a 500K loan with 1K/month payments, basic math should tell you that doesn't add up. Also when people buying 500K homes are high earning professionals that should also be a clue. Again if is seems to good. .. .You cannot regulate and legislate for every stupid person out there and unfortunately that's where the left would have us go. A little personal responsibility is NOT too much to ask.

Jenny - posted on 07/27/2011

4,426

16

126

Christa, one thing to take into account in all of that is stupid people. We are not all smart enough to understand the "simple math" of these loans. What they do understand is the sales tactics of the lenders who are assuring them it's a good thing to sign on the dotted line. Common sense is not common. These lenders were using predatory tactics and should be held accountable.

Christa - posted on 07/27/2011

3,876

14

209

Karla, what do you want me to say to your point? I’ve already admitted the right had their part in the collapse. What I have not heard is anyone on the left take responsibility for their part. And I’m sorry but I’m not buying that people had no other choice but to take out these ridiculous loans that a little bit of common sense and basic math told you you couldn’t afford because they hadn’t gotten a raise in 15 years. If you can’t afford something don’t buy it. People rent all the time or buy cheaper homes. It’s called living within your means and MANY who got the bad loans should have known they couldn’t actually afford them. The old saying if it’s too good to be true it probably is. I’m so sick of people passing the blame instead of owning up to their part in things.


Krista, 3 RINO's voting for 1 of 2 bills with NO other R support is NOT bipartisan, it's just picking off the weakest link to shove things down our throats. Now if the bills weren't far enough left for you that’s your (not yours specifically but the left in the US) elected leaders fault. The right didn't want any of it EVER. And if we don’t like it and the left doesn’t like it why the heck was it passed??
There have been a couple jabs at the current debt ceiling discussion and I’d love to discuss that on another thread. But again it’s just an example of the left not owning their part in this mess. Things might actually get accomplished if the left can own up to their faults and stop blaming the republicans.

To the O'Reilly comments I actually agree with him on some of his tea party remarks. *gasp* Maybe you should stop making assumptions about all republicans.

Krista - posted on 07/27/2011

12,562

16

842

They're moving the Overton Window so frequently that right-wing pundits are now never seen without an economy-sized bottle of Windex with which to wipe off their grubby little fingerprints.

ME - posted on 07/27/2011

2,978

18

190

David Brooks let em have it the other day too...but then, I hear they consider him a 'liberal' now...smh...

Krista - posted on 07/27/2011

12,562

16

842

Yep. When Bill O'Reilly is saying that the Republicans have gone too far, that's when you know that they've gone completely beyond the point of anything resembling reason.

Karla - posted on 07/26/2011

1,555

48

87

@ Christa: “Since you all have decided to suspend reality and spin the events of the last few years, I see no point in arguing this further.”

I do believe I addressed your points, and I’m sure I used factual information. You quit? How very fitting.

When I hear the likes of Bill O’Reilly and David Brooks saying the current Republican House does not understand that compromise is an integral part of their job, then I know I’m NOT being extreme. You think Liberals are displaying a brick wall? In the course of National events right now the brick wall belongs to Republicans. Furthermore their unyielding attitude and inaction will stagnate and deteriorate our country. I’ll just give you my sarcastic “thank you very much” right now.

If you cannot find the words or facts to address my points, I totally understand. It’s hard when you are working with only other peoples’ (aka Wynn’s) opinions.

Krista - posted on 07/26/2011

12,562

16

842

Hm. Interesting that you see them as the ones spinning reality.

http://www.wbur.org/2009/10/13/health-ca...

WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe broke with her party Tuesday and said she will vote for a Democratic health care bill, handing President Obama a much-sought boost in his quest to expand access to medical coverage to all Americans....

Also see: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/62727...

And Grassley WAS considering signing. Max Baucus did everything but offer up his first-born to him, in order to get his and Snowe's votes.

That's why so many people are dissatisfied with the bill. The right-wingers think it went too far. The left wing thinks it didn't go anywhere near far enough, and that the final bill was a bunch of watered-down pablum, due to Obama's efforts to woo Snowe and Grassley.

But hey, you just go on believing that all of America feels the exact same way you do, m'kay?

Dana - posted on 07/26/2011

11,264

35

489

Yes, I agree, Emily it is like we're talking to a brick wall. ;) I'm glad you find the Republicans failure to work with others so amusing too.

Emily - posted on 07/26/2011

67

0

5

It's like talking to a brick wall....that's why I've come to just sit back, watch, and laugh. I wonder just how bad things have to get before reality smacks them in the face.

Christa - posted on 07/26/2011

3,876

14

209

Since you all have decided to suspend reality and spin the events of the last few years, I see no point in arguing this further.

Karla - posted on 07/25/2011

1,555

48

87

Christa,
Even though I agree that both Democratic and Republican leaders contributed to the housing bubble (boom and bust) the debate is much more complicated than that. So many economists predicted the recession; it’s ridiculous that Greenspan, etc. kept the status quo. (FYI: I read that Greenspan and the head of HUD apologized for their recommendations in allowing high risk loans. I feel like saying, “Really? You helped screw us all over and you think ‘I’m sorry’ is going to cut-it?”)

These decisions were benefiting Banks; I didn’t hear any of them complaining at the time. As a matter of fact I only heard economists warning us, never complaints from borrowers or lenders or politicians. The economists’ warnings were blatantly ignored.

Frankly, a big part of the discussion on what happened, points to the extreme indebtedness of the US economy. (Not to be confused with the US government debt.) This indebtedness is caused by middle class wages staying the same or decreasing while wealth concentrates on the top so that the average person finds it harder and harder to make ends meet. Middle class people were not trying to “keep up with the Joneses” but rather were paying the electric bill with a credit card, or getting a home equity loan to MAINTAIN.

I’m sure many people would charge that these average people should have been fiscally responsible and cut back on expenses. But I will say, when you find your family income is the same today as it was 15 years ago, but 15 years ago you had one income and now you have two incomes… something is wrong.

Currently the US is in recovery. Technically the market indicates the recession is over. (as long as those in Congress don’t botch it up with this debt ceiling issue.) Everyone should know that China’s recovery is working better than ours because they had a much larger government bailout!

So you can see why I find it very frustrating, uninformed and short-sighted to be blaming Obama for what happened, or how he is handling recovery issues.

Sara - posted on 07/25/2011

9,313

50

584

There was plenty of compromise on both Healthcare reform (remember all the negotiatio­ns with Olympia Snowe and Chuck Grassley) and the Stimulus which was smaller than originally proposed and was 40% tax cuts. After the changes Republican­s demanded were agreed to, none of them followed through on a bi-partisa­n vote. That's a matter of public record.

Republican­s' definition of compromise is capitulati­on.

Dana - posted on 07/25/2011

11,264

35

489

Are you guys freaking serious? There was no compromise on that legislation?? You may find my recollection of that ridiculous but, rest assured I find yours to be equally ridiculous.

Jennifer - posted on 07/25/2011

317

11

19

He speaks the truth. Can't understand how he got caught up supporting Harry Reid and voted for Obama...but he is on it with this evaluation.

Jennifer - posted on 07/25/2011

317

11

19

@Schenkers re: Obamacare. That was completely democrat legislation and BO's signature accomplishment. There was no compromise and no repubs votes for it, but interesting how you seem to recall a totally different reality on that.

Christa - posted on 07/25/2011

3,876

14

209

Compromise? Really? How many Republicans voted for that again?? In case you forgot ZERO republican members of the house voted for either and only three RINO's in the senate voted for the stimulus. Anyway I don't want to get caught on a tangent, there are other things I commented about I'd rather discuss. :)

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms