Elizabeth Warren Fights Back Against the "Magical Accounting" of Trickle-Down Economics

[The Rabbi]

Tax cuts do not cost anything there is no unless, no buts.

Government spending is what costs money. Hence government should be tightly controlled and only big enough to perform it's specifically enumerated functions so as to be as little of a burden on the people as possible.

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

It always amuses me when Conservatives think local and state are not government. Only the federal level is somehow "evil"

Government is still government. It still comes out of our pockets

We just perform government functions at the level that is most efficient. Sometimes it's local, sometimes national

It always amuses me that you move the goalposts when shown to be wrong or deflect to something else.
Even the most ardent libertarian will tell you gov't has some legitimate functions. But what the federal government is doing is way beyond anything resembling a legitimate function, in many cases taking over somethign that ought to be a state or local matter.

 

[The Rabbi]

The fact that our government made that decision doesn't mean that individual citizens would choose to hire them. None of us would given the opportunity to make another choice.

We the people have repeatedly chosen to support free schools, police and fire as well as other government services

None of that is free

And?

Hows that free policing working out in Detroit

You mean that city that the Capitalists used up and abandoned?

Um Capitalists dont use up and abandon things, nutjobber. Capitalists make investments in plant and equipment and maintain them to make money.
Socialists used up Detroit for their own personal benefit.

 

[rightwinger]

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

It always amuses me when Conservatives think local and state are not government. Only the federal level is somehow "evil"

Government is still government. It still comes out of our pockets

We just perform government functions at the level that is most efficient. Sometimes it's local, sometimes national

It always amuses me that you move the goalposts when shown to be wrong or deflect to something else.
Even the most ardent libertarian will tell you gov't has some legitimate functions. But what the federal government is doing is way beyond anything resembling a legitimate function, in many cases taking over somethign that ought to be a state or local matter.

The decision on the boundary between local, state and federal functions has been going on for generations

Early in our history, we were limited to doing things at the local level. In modern times, the Federal Government has taken over more of a role and we have become the most powerful economic and military power in the world

 

[rightwinger]

UNLESS you cut spending, they sure as fukkk should be offset!!!!!

Of course 33 years of Reaganomics/Bushanomics where 90%+ of the debt can be traced back to their POLICIES, doesn't matter right?

Tax cuts do not cost anything there is no unless, no buts.

Government spending is what costs money. Hence government should be tightly controlled and only big enough to perform it's specifically enumerated functions so as to be as little of a burden on the people as possible.

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

 

[Stephanie]

We the people have repeatedly chosen to support free schools, police and fire as well as other government services

None of that is free

And?

Hows that free policing working out in Detroit

You mean that city that the Capitalists used up and abandoned?

Um Capitalists dont use up and abandon things, nutjobber. Capitalists make investments in plant and equipment and maintain them to make money.
Socialists used up Detroit for their own personal benefit.

yep, the brainwashed of some people is frikken scary because they VOTE for all our lives.
Wrongwinger sounds like a walking talking point parrot

 

[The Rabbi]

Tax cuts do not cost anything there is no unless, no buts.

Government spending is what costs money. Hence government should be tightly controlled and only big enough to perform it's specifically enumerated functions so as to be as little of a burden on the people as possible.

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

 

[Dad2three]

In any event, Lizzy Cheekbones economic ideas come with a time tested 100% Guaranteed Fail.


But that's what Dems want and thrive on: Failure and misery

As opposed to 35 years of Supply Side fail?

Exceot there hasnt been 35 years of supply side fail.
There was 8 years of supply side success until Bush I renegged o his no new taxes pledge.
There was 7 years of sort of supply side success when W Bush ended the Clinton Recession.
There have been 8 years of Keynesian failure as the Democrats took over govenment and we've seen the worst recovery from a recession on record.

Stop using conservative 'math' Bubba

Obama has been in office not even 6 years yet and Dubya used supply side for 8, lol.... Even stopping at the peak of his term, he had 4 million PRIVATE sector jobs in 7 years, then like Ronnie's S&L crisis that Poppy inherited, consequences from ignoring regulator warnings (like Reagan), pushed US into the worst recession since the GOP's great depression!

 

[Dad2three]

We the people have repeatedly chosen to support free schools, police and fire as well as other government services

None of that is free

And?

Hows that free policing working out in Detroit

You mean that city that the Capitalists used up and abandoned?

Um Capitalists dont use up and abandon things, nutjobber. Capitalists make investments in plant and equipment and maintain them to make money.
Socialists used up Detroit for their own personal benefit.

"Um Capitalists dont use up and abandon things, nutjobber. Capitalists make investments in plant and equipment and maintain them to make money."

UNLESS of course they can move their production and pay slave wages

Capitalism has failed to bring about a good life for most of the people of the world and it is time to face the truth

 

[Wry Catcher]

Tell me dumbass, is the population in the U.S. increasing each year?..Simply yes or no will do!

Yet MILLIONS of baby boomers are NOT going to be straining the SS system???

"But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does."

You bet they are.

Another assfucking by the liberals.

Yeah, 'liberals' caused Dubya/GOP's policies that crashed the US economy??? lol

Now, you're going to LIE about that as we've been through this before!..Of course you are, you have NOTHING ELSE!

LOL, STOP PROJECTING DUMMY


Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative


Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Facts need to be presented as they have been above by Dad4three; notice the only fact one sees in the posts by Listening, bripat, crusaderfrank and vigilante are single sentence personal attacks or the even less substantive idiot-gram.

Kudos to Dad4three and his efforts to post evidence which exposes the four partisan jerks for what they are: partisan jerks, and ignorant.

The four can only prove they are unable to write anything to prove anything but for the fact that they are fools.

 

[Dad2three]

None of that is free

And?

Hows that free policing working out in Detroit

You mean that city that the Capitalists used up and abandoned?

Um Capitalists dont use up and abandon things, nutjobber. Capitalists make investments in plant and equipment and maintain them to make money.
Socialists used up Detroit for their own personal benefit.

yep, the brainwashed of some people is frikken scary because they VOTE for all our lives.
Wrongwinger sounds like a walking talking point parrot

"frikken scary because they VOTE for all our lives."


NOT if left up to cons/GOP

Paul Weyrich, "father" of the right-wing movement and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority and various other groups:

"Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

Another Elderly Woman Gets Caught in GOP’s War on Voting

Another Elderly Woman Gets Caught in GOP s War on Voting BillMoyers.com

 

[rightwinger]

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

I tend to believe you have spent your lifetime without a teacher

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yeah, 'liberals' caused Dubya/GOP's policies that crashed the US economy??? lol

Now, you're going to LIE about that as we've been through this before!..Of course you are, you have NOTHING ELSE!

Bush's documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment banks capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional $440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards



"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN’T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Today, the Washington Times incorrectly accused the White House of ignoring warnings of trouble ahead for government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) and neglecting to "adopt any reform until this summer," when it was too late. "Neither the White House nor Congress heeded the warnings, Fannie and Freddie retained strong bipartisan support during the 1990s and early part of this decade." (Editorial, "Hear, See And Speak No Evil About Fannie And Freddie," The Washington Times, 10/9/08)
Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. In fact, it was Congress that flatly rejected President Bush's call more than five years ago to reform the GSEs. Over the years, the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems with the GSEs.
2001

• April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002

• May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

• February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.
  
  
• September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
  
  
• September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)
  
  
• October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)
  
  
• November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

• February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
  
  
• February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
  
  
• April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)
  
  
• June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

• April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
  
  
• July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007

• August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
  
  
• August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)
  
  
• December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008

• February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
  
  
• March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
  
  
• April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
  
  
• May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
  • "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
    
    
  • "[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
    
    
  • "Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
• June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
  
  
• July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
  
  
• September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

So Dubya was a pussy and couldn't get the GOP Congress to go along, to even ATTEMPT votes on ANY reforms of GSE other than HR 1461 which passed with bipartisan support which Dubya opposed??? Weird



STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


lol

Nice to see you admit to DemocRAT treachery! Thank you!

That's it? No rebutal, no retort, nothing of substance to defend booooooooooooosh&Co? Color me surprised.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Dud2.3 can't compose a coherent point or post. That must be W's fault.

Got it, you are brain dead

Wrong, but even if it were true, it's smething a moron like you couldn't ascertain anyway.

give up shitwit.

You lack the capacity to post intelligently.

You clearly lack the ability to post anything of merit.

You lack the ability, knowledge or honesty to post a rebuttal. Prove you are no different than vigilante, crusaderfrank, bripat or listening - your posts suggest you are one and the same.

At least you could channel PoliticalChic and rewrite history, of course that takes more than using a thesaurus.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

Does Rabbi ever consider the obvious, or is his bias and ideology keeping him ignorant? Is the FBI a police force? Does the CDC employ doctors? Does the FDA employ scientists, does the FED employee economists.

 

[bripat9643]

Tax cuts do not cost anything there is no unless, no buts.

Government spending is what costs money. Hence government should be tightly controlled and only big enough to perform it's specifically enumerated functions so as to be as little of a burden on the people as possible.

Government provides services to We the People they are not a burden but an essential element of society

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

True, but no one needs them. All these services are better handled by private firms. Government teachers cost 3 times as much and they do a shitty job. They spend more time brainwashing your kid and abusing the males than they do teaching them the 3 'R's.

 

[bripat9643]

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

I tend to believe you have spent your lifetime without a teacher

I tend to believe you rode the short bus to school.

 

[bripat9643]

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

Does Rabbi ever consider the obvious, or is his bias and ideology keeping him ignorant? Is the FBI a police force? Does the CDC employ doctors? Does the FDA employ scientists, does the FED employee economists.

The Constitution doesn't authorise the FBI or the FED or the FDA or the CDC.

 

[rightwinger]

Nobody wants the so-called "services" government provides. Being fined thousands of dollars for filling in a pond on my land is not a service. Government is a burden. It definitely isn't "essential" by any stretch of the imagination.

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

Does Rabbi ever consider the obvious, or is his bias and ideology keeping him ignorant? Is the FBI a police force? Does the CDC employ doctors? Does the FDA employ scientists, does the FED employee economists.

Let Rabbi wallow in his ignorance.......he seems to cherish it

 

[Stephanie]

Warren is another phony fraud Progressive politician. Now she comes out ranting on trickle down, AFTER she has made her MILLIONS from it. I just hope the people LEARNED from putting in Obama and then kicking his party out of POWER in Congress because of him and his party of radicals, they don't fall for another inexperienced JUNIOR FRIKKEN Senator if she runs for President.

 

[rightwinger]

Interesting.......police, fire, teachers, doctors, engineers, scientists, economists

Nobody wants them except for nutbat libertarians

Police, firemen, teachers last I checked were employed by municipalities, not the federal government.
Doctors are employed by hospitals or physician groups, not the government
Engineers are employed by corporations.
Economicsts are employed by banks, brokerage houses, and universities.

Bureaucrats assessing your raisin crop are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats issuing licenses so people can build on their own property are employed by the federal government
Bureaucrats handing out grants to study Chinese prostitutes' alcoholism are employed by the federal gov't.
Remind me why we need about 70% of the federal govt?

Must be hard living your life in a cave

The Federal Government has policemen, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, lawyers and economists

Move those goalposts.
I could live a lifetime without needing a federal policeman, fireman, or teacher.

Does Rabbi ever consider the obvious, or is his bias and ideology keeping him ignorant? Is the FBI a police force? Does the CDC employ doctors? Does the FDA employ scientists, does the FED employee economists.

The Constitution doesn't authorise the FBI or the FED or the FDA or the CDC.

Or an Air Force or NASA or the Internet Police

They were so ignorant when it came to the needs of future societies