Let's Talk.........I mean REALLY Talk.......

[boedicca]

leave your partisan bullshit at the door.....forget the left versus right paradigm. I want to know how you really feel about the direction of this country in the last 36 years and how you feel it has gotten better, gotten worse. Leave your political affiliations at the door explain what you see is happening and why.........most of us remember the Nixon and Carter days. We have seen the change.........

My personal believe is that we are in serious trouble and I am talking about the kind of trouble that will make the orchestrated crash of 1929 seem tame by comparison....wanna talk me off the ledge? Please do so.....

When I was little kid, I can remember my grandfather in the late 40's proclaiming the pending financial downfall of the the country's due to 250 billion dollar war debt. Well, that debt has grown to about 19 trillion dollars over the last 65 years and during that time life has been pretty good to most Americans compared to previous 65 years.

As headlines often remind us, each U.S. citizen owes a share of our currently $19 trillion public debt. But Americans also own approximately $12 trillion of that debt – as participants in Social Security, insurance policyholders, participants in pension funds, stockholders, or, more directly, by virtue of having purchased Treasury notes. “Treasuries” are very secure, and those not owned by Americans are held by foreign banks and governments that are glad for the chance to lend money, securely, to the United States.

The size of national debt in itself is no real importance. What is important is that holders of that debt have faith that the United States will make good on it's promise to pay them back with interest. So as long as people have faith in the US government, we will continue to sell new debt to pay off old. There is really no limit to how high the debt can rise, as long as creditors trust the US to make good on it's promises.

I think there are an awfully lot of things to worry about that more important than the size of the US debt.
Why There is Nothing Scary about the U.S. National Debt | Scholars Strategy Network

Yeah.....keep on believing that fallacy and spare me a thought when the whole thing collapses because it will under the very weight of it's debt that we are not liable for.

The nation is not going to come crashing down because of the weight of it's debt for several very good reasons.

• First of all the debt will never have to be paid off. The government, unlike us, doesn't need to pay back its debts before it dies, because it doesn't die. In other words, the government can just roll over its debts in perpetuity.
• Second, interest on the debt will not bring down the nation. It could force us to increase taxes or cut spending which would could have a negative impact on the economy.
• Lastly, the only way our debt burden can bring down the nation is if our creditors, find another government which offers more safety of principal and a large enough debt offering to meet their needs. That certainly does not seem likely in the foreseeable future.

Your economic and historical illiteracy is showing. Excessive debt causes nations to fail.

Add the reported debt to the $Trillions of unfunded liabilities for SS and Medicare, and the country is technically insolvent. The Fed is desperate to keep ZIRP in place because normal interest rates would hundreds of $ Billions to annual expenditures. Get ready for NIRP and a cashless society. I'm sure you'll love those.

It is not the size of debt that is important. It's the ability of the country to continue to refinance debt and make interest payments. Interest payments on US debt stands at 6% of budget. Even if it were twice that we could easily manage it because we have the capacity to cut spending or increase revenue. The only way the nation will default would be if we choose to do so.

Interest is 6% because of ZIRP. With normal interest rates, that would balloon to 15-20%.

Try reading the 2015 Annual Report produced by the U.S. Treasury. It uses GAAP-like accounting (i.e. accrual method instead of the bogus cash accounting used for government budgeting).

I refer you to page 62, which shows the present value of SS and Medicare liabilities. It's pretty ugly. And this is not reflected in the $20T of current debt. When interest payments rise, this situation will get worse, which is why the Feds are destroying the savings of individuals via ZIRP to keep this scam going. It's quite possible that they will move to NIRP as well.

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/finrep/fr/15frusg/FinancialStatement_2015.pdf

 

[boedicca]

Same old bullshit. Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

I can tell by your response that you know I am right on this. And while I agree with you that "speculation" in the markets isn't helpful, it's beyond juvenile, asinine, and absurd to say "unchecked". How the fuck do you regulate opinion? How the fuck do you regulate rumors? Only an oppressive dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's could even begin to attempt to do something like that. If that's the world you want to live in - get the fuck out of the U.S. winger. Because we're not allowing that here in our country.

It wasn't Wall Street that started the collapse. It was the housing market. And that was the result of government intervention implementing socialism. When the banks were on the line for the money, they didn't make risky and reckless loans. When government was on the line for the money, the banks went crazy because it was free money falling from the sky for them.

That's what happens with idiot government intervention. It's the same reason why college costs have skyrocketed and why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. When the consumer and the business aren't the people paying or assuming the risk, then they become reckless. It is why the true free market is so flawless. As the consumer paying, I'm not going to pay too much or pay for what I don't need. As a bank with my ass on the line for the loan, I'm not going to make risky loans. I'm going to make very safe loans for small amounts of money to people with incredible credit history. It's only when socialism enters the picture and the consumer isn't paying and the business isn't taking the risk that everything falls apart. History has proven it and now Dumbocrats have proven it right here in the U.S.

It was speculation in the housing market. I saw the value of my house rise from $160,000 to almost $400,000 in a matter of months
People borrowed against this new found wealth and houses were repeatedly flipped for huge profit

It was greed not lending to poor people that caused the collapse

It was much more complicated than that, bub. Congress, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Executive Branch regulatory apparatus, Clinton, Wall Street, Realtors, ACORN, and yes, poor people and other people who chose to sign up for zero down loans.

Reckless Endangerment is the best analysis I've read to date on the matter.

 

[P@triot]

The "trickle down" theory didn't work. The trickle down went sideways... to Asia. Jobs and manufacturing went with it and the middle class hasn't seen a raise in years. People have always voted with their wallets and their wallets haven't looked this thin since the 1970s. So, sorry but....Thanks Reagan. Thanks Bush family. True to form they made a horrendous mess and then left it to a black guy to blame it all on.

Except that it wasn't "trickle down" that sent jobs overseas genius. There was nothing about those polices that sent jobs overseas. It was Dumbocrat policy that sent jobs overseas.

It's hilarious listening to people who have no idea what they are talking about parrot liberal talking points. You really are slaves to those people. You do no homework of your own, you do not research anything, you just believe whatever they tell you. What an awful way to live.

It was liberal policy that sent jobs overseas. When taxes and regulations make it too expensive to keep your labor in the U.S., businesses send it overseas.

Apple is the wealthiest company in the world. They are sitting on $178 billion in cash. So why would a company sitting on that kind of money take a loan? Why take a loan that must be paid back with interest when you have that type of cash? Because we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world and that $178 billion is overseas where taxes are lower thanks to idiot liberal policy. It is actually cheaper for Apple to take a loan and pay it back with interest than it is for Apple to bring that money back into the U.S. and pay taxes on it. How ridiculous is that? And here is the worst part - that $178 billion is sitting in another county helping their economy. If it were here in the U.S. - banks would be loaning it out where it would not only stimulate our economy as it was spent by the people taking the loans, but it would be bringing U.S. banks interest. Instead, none of that is happening because of ignorant Dumbocrat policy which run jobs and corporations over seas where it is cheaper for them to do business.

Apple just took out a $6.5 billion loan even though it's sitting on $178 billion in cash

 

[P@triot]

Same old bullshit. Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

I can tell by your response that you know I am right on this. And while I agree with you that "speculation" in the markets isn't helpful, it's beyond juvenile, asinine, and absurd to say "unchecked". How the fuck do you regulate opinion? How the fuck do you regulate rumors? Only an oppressive dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's could even begin to attempt to do something like that. If that's the world you want to live in - get the fuck out of the U.S. winger. Because we're not allowing that here in our country.

It wasn't Wall Street that started the collapse. It was the housing market. And that was the result of government intervention implementing socialism. When the banks were on the line for the money, they didn't make risky and reckless loans. When government was on the line for the money, the banks went crazy because it was free money falling from the sky for them.

That's what happens with idiot government intervention. It's the same reason why college costs have skyrocketed and why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. When the consumer and the business aren't the people paying or assuming the risk, then they become reckless. It is why the true free market is so flawless. As the consumer paying, I'm not going to pay too much or pay for what I don't need. As a bank with my ass on the line for the loan, I'm not going to make risky loans. I'm going to make very safe loans for small amounts of money to people with incredible credit history. It's only when socialism enters the picture and the consumer isn't paying and the business isn't taking the risk that everything falls apart. History has proven it and now Dumbocrats have proven it right here in the U.S.

It was speculation in the housing market. I saw the value of my house rise from $160,000 to almost $400,000 in a matter of months
People borrowed against this new found wealth and houses were repeatedly flipped for huge profit

It was greed not lending to poor people that caused the collapse

Greed doesn't cause collapse. Lending money to people who can't and didn't pay it back leads to collapse. And it did.

 

[P@triot]

Agreed. The union has assumed powers that the states never delegated to it. The sovereign states need to bring their creation to heel.

again, have you seen state governments in action? The ones who can't pass budgets but can take the time to play bathroom police?

Of course you guys like nameless officials elected in off years when no one pays attention.

So you don't think that people can effectively govern themselves?

As Ronald Reagan said "If no one among us is capable of governing themselves, who among us is capable of governing others"? Boom! Game over.

 

[Tehon]

I blame the "job creators". They are the ones touted to save the country if only we would give them less regulation and lower taxes. Just watch the economy grow and wealth and prosperity trickle down

And that's exactly what happened. Until Bill Clinton came along and signed his 1997 Community Re-Investment Act which forced banks to make loans they refused to previously make while at the same time removed all risk for banks and incentivized them to make reckless loans because the money would be guaranteed either way by Freddie and Fannie.

There is a simple reality that you are aware of but refuse to admit because you'd rather see everyone in poverty with you due to your envy (misery loves company). You can have trickle down prosperity or flood up poverty. There is nothing else.

Do you know why the tech world is booming right now? Because they move faster than government so they are free from regulations and restrictions (sadly, they still have the devastating taxes or they would be even more successful). HBO has been running a documentary called "San Francisco 2.0" in which they discuss this. San Francisco offered tech companies tax incentives to move to San Francisco. Now for starters - if lowering taxes doesn't improve an economy - why would liberal San Francisco offer tax breaks to those companies? Because we all know you liberals are lying through your teeth when you claim that tax breaks don't help the economy. You know it. You just won't admit it. But that aside, the documentary goes on to speak with tech companies about why they can thrive even if bad economies. Here is what they said: Free from mandatory "hack licenses", free from "inspections", free from "regulations", Uber is thriving. They can code something on a phone and launch a business a the speed of light. It takes government time to catch up and attempt to strangle that business with regulations.

Sorry RW....but this documentary alone proves that you're a liar. The fact is, you know you're lying too. But you'd rather see everyone in property with you (like Cuba) then see the majority of American thriving and have to live with some people having a lifestyle you don't have.

And that's exactly what happened. Until Bill Clinton came along and signed his 1997 Community Re-Investment Act which forced banks to make loans they refused to previously make while at the same time removed all risk for banks and incentivized them to make reckless loans because the money would be guaranteed either way by Freddie and Fannie.

As usual, you are clueless.

FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?
The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

 

[P@triot]

again, have you seen state governments in action? The ones who can't pass budgets but can take the time to play bathroom police?

What an incredibly absurd response. There is so much wrong with that nonsensical post I'm not sure where to start.

First, even if what you said was correct (and it's not), so what? Even if state government do an awful job, it doesn't give the federal government the right to overstep their authority. They don't get to break the law if they think the states aren't doing a good job. What an asinine claim. "Oh - it's ok to engage in illegal activity if you think a state isn't doing a good job". Um...no. No it isn't. Breaking the law is breaking the law and it is never ok.

Second, how can you even have the audacity to mention not passing budgets when the federal government hasn't passed a budget since George W. Bush was in office?!? Congress under Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never passed a single budget during the Barry Sorento Administration and the Republican's haven't under Paul Ryan either. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound on this one?

Third - who cares? I could care less if North Carolina doesn't pass a budget because they are focused on protecting women and children from sexual predators. And unless you live in North Carolina, you shouldn't care either unless you're a little Adolf Hitler wannabe desperate to exert power and control over others to compensate for your sad, little life. That's the beauty of our system. 50 independent states - 49 of which will never effect you no matter how stupid they are. But we all pay a price when the federal government is stupid. It's the single biggest reason why we need to return to constitutional government. The redundancy of 50 individual states protects us from a single point of failure that we get with one federal government.

 

[ChrisL]

Same old bullshit. Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

I can tell by your response that you know I am right on this. And while I agree with you that "speculation" in the markets isn't helpful, it's beyond juvenile, asinine, and absurd to say "unchecked". How the fuck do you regulate opinion? How the fuck do you regulate rumors? Only an oppressive dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's could even begin to attempt to do something like that. If that's the world you want to live in - get the fuck out of the U.S. winger. Because we're not allowing that here in our country.

It wasn't Wall Street that started the collapse. It was the housing market. And that was the result of government intervention implementing socialism. When the banks were on the line for the money, they didn't make risky and reckless loans. When government was on the line for the money, the banks went crazy because it was free money falling from the sky for them.

That's what happens with idiot government intervention. It's the same reason why college costs have skyrocketed and why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. When the consumer and the business aren't the people paying or assuming the risk, then they become reckless. It is why the true free market is so flawless. As the consumer paying, I'm not going to pay too much or pay for what I don't need. As a bank with my ass on the line for the loan, I'm not going to make risky loans. I'm going to make very safe loans for small amounts of money to people with incredible credit history. It's only when socialism enters the picture and the consumer isn't paying and the business isn't taking the risk that everything falls apart. History has proven it and now Dumbocrats have proven it right here in the U.S.

It was speculation in the housing market. I saw the value of my house rise from $160,000 to almost $400,000 in a matter of months
People borrowed against this new found wealth and houses were repeatedly flipped for huge profit

It was greed not lending to poor people that caused the collapse

I think the whole thing was that people were unable to pay back their loans, MANY people, who were also encouraged to spend more than they could actually afford in reality. Not to mention the skimming off the top by the higher ups (and with that goes government kickbacks to turn their heads).

 

[ChrisL]

I blame the "job creators". They are the ones touted to save the country if only we would give them less regulation and lower taxes. Just watch the economy grow and wealth and prosperity trickle down

And that's exactly what happened. Until Bill Clinton came along and signed his 1997 Community Re-Investment Act which forced banks to make loans they refused to previously make while at the same time removed all risk for banks and incentivized them to make reckless loans because the money would be guaranteed either way by Freddie and Fannie.

There is a simple reality that you are aware of but refuse to admit because you'd rather see everyone in poverty with you due to your envy (misery loves company). You can have trickle down prosperity or flood up poverty. There is nothing else.

Do you know why the tech world is booming right now? Because they move faster than government so they are free from regulations and restrictions (sadly, they still have the devastating taxes or they would be even more successful). HBO has been running a documentary called "San Francisco 2.0" in which they discuss this. San Francisco offered tech companies tax incentives to move to San Francisco. Now for starters - if lowering taxes doesn't improve an economy - why would liberal San Francisco offer tax breaks to those companies? Because we all know you liberals are lying through your teeth when you claim that tax breaks don't help the economy. You know it. You just won't admit it. But that aside, the documentary goes on to speak with tech companies about why they can thrive even if bad economies. Here is what they said: Free from mandatory "hack licenses", free from "inspections", free from "regulations", Uber is thriving. They can code something on a phone and launch a business a the speed of light. It takes government time to catch up and attempt to strangle that business with regulations.

Sorry RW....but this documentary alone proves that you're a liar. The fact is, you know you're lying too. But you'd rather see everyone in property with you (like Cuba) then see the majority of American thriving and have to live with some people having a lifestyle you don't have.

Same old bullshit

Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

Whose pet project were Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac?

The People Responsible for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (FMCC, FNMA)

Red herrings

Nope, not a "red herring." These institutions played a direct role in the housing market collapse.

 

[P@triot]

I blame the "job creators". They are the ones touted to save the country if only we would give them less regulation and lower taxes. Just watch the economy grow and wealth and prosperity trickle down

And that's exactly what happened. Until Bill Clinton came along and signed his 1997 Community Re-Investment Act which forced banks to make loans they refused to previously make while at the same time removed all risk for banks and incentivized them to make reckless loans because the money would be guaranteed either way by Freddie and Fannie.

There is a simple reality that you are aware of but refuse to admit because you'd rather see everyone in poverty with you due to your envy (misery loves company). You can have trickle down prosperity or flood up poverty. There is nothing else.

Do you know why the tech world is booming right now? Because they move faster than government so they are free from regulations and restrictions (sadly, they still have the devastating taxes or they would be even more successful). HBO has been running a documentary called "San Francisco 2.0" in which they discuss this. San Francisco offered tech companies tax incentives to move to San Francisco. Now for starters - if lowering taxes doesn't improve an economy - why would liberal San Francisco offer tax breaks to those companies? Because we all know you liberals are lying through your teeth when you claim that tax breaks don't help the economy. You know it. You just won't admit it. But that aside, the documentary goes on to speak with tech companies about why they can thrive even if bad economies. Here is what they said: Free from mandatory "hack licenses", free from "inspections", free from "regulations", Uber is thriving. They can code something on a phone and launch a business a the speed of light. It takes government time to catch up and attempt to strangle that business with regulations.

Sorry RW....but this documentary alone proves that you're a liar. The fact is, you know you're lying too. But you'd rather see everyone in property with you (like Cuba) then see the majority of American thriving and have to live with some people having a lifestyle you don't have.

And that's exactly what happened. Until Bill Clinton came along and signed his 1997 Community Re-Investment Act which forced banks to make loans they refused to previously make while at the same time removed all risk for banks and incentivized them to make reckless loans because the money would be guaranteed either way by Freddie and Fannie.

As usual, you are clueless.

FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?
The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

Really? Barack Obama's radical left-wing administration found "no connection between the CRA and the housing collapse"? Shocking! Strangely enough, Barry Sorento's radical administration has also found no connection between their failure to provide proper security and the deaths of American's in Benghazi, they've found no connection between their failure to secure guns in the Fast & Furious program and the deaths of innocent people around the world, and they've found no connection between their reckless spending and the $20 trillion in debt.

This has been well documented you partisan hack. The banks made reckless loans to people who couldn't afford them because of the 1997 Community Re-Investment Act and that is what lead to the housing collapse. It's a fact.

 

[BlueGin]

I know I will be called a racist, but I saw a recent poll on 'Morning Joe' that had 91% of the African-Americans voting for Hillary and 1% voting for Trump. No, not a typo! Hillary promises more free stuff and Trump promises more jobs. What does that mean?

It means, why should these lazy bastards work when the Minorities can collect Welfare for free; and the promise of jobs leads nowhere but Minimum Wage at 30 hours a week!

One of the qualifications for public assistance is that you have to either have a job or be a full time student.

 

[rightwinger]

Same old bullshit. Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

I can tell by your response that you know I am right on this. And while I agree with you that "speculation" in the markets isn't helpful, it's beyond juvenile, asinine, and absurd to say "unchecked". How the fuck do you regulate opinion? How the fuck do you regulate rumors? Only an oppressive dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's could even begin to attempt to do something like that. If that's the world you want to live in - get the fuck out of the U.S. winger. Because we're not allowing that here in our country.

It wasn't Wall Street that started the collapse. It was the housing market. And that was the result of government intervention implementing socialism. When the banks were on the line for the money, they didn't make risky and reckless loans. When government was on the line for the money, the banks went crazy because it was free money falling from the sky for them.

That's what happens with idiot government intervention. It's the same reason why college costs have skyrocketed and why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. When the consumer and the business aren't the people paying or assuming the risk, then they become reckless. It is why the true free market is so flawless. As the consumer paying, I'm not going to pay too much or pay for what I don't need. As a bank with my ass on the line for the loan, I'm not going to make risky loans. I'm going to make very safe loans for small amounts of money to people with incredible credit history. It's only when socialism enters the picture and the consumer isn't paying and the business isn't taking the risk that everything falls apart. History has proven it and now Dumbocrats have proven it right here in the U.S.

It was speculation in the housing market. I saw the value of my house rise from $160,000 to almost $400,000 in a matter of months
People borrowed against this new found wealth and houses were repeatedly flipped for huge profit

It was greed not lending to poor people that caused the collapse

It was much more complicated than that, bub. Congress, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Executive Branch regulatory apparatus, Clinton, Wall Street, Realtors, ACORN, and yes, poor people and other people who chose to sign up for zero down loans.

Reckless Endangerment is the best analysis I've read to date on the matter.

You left Bush off that list

Color me surprised

 

[boedicca]

Same old bullshit. Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

I can tell by your response that you know I am right on this. And while I agree with you that "speculation" in the markets isn't helpful, it's beyond juvenile, asinine, and absurd to say "unchecked". How the fuck do you regulate opinion? How the fuck do you regulate rumors? Only an oppressive dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's could even begin to attempt to do something like that. If that's the world you want to live in - get the fuck out of the U.S. winger. Because we're not allowing that here in our country.

It wasn't Wall Street that started the collapse. It was the housing market. And that was the result of government intervention implementing socialism. When the banks were on the line for the money, they didn't make risky and reckless loans. When government was on the line for the money, the banks went crazy because it was free money falling from the sky for them.

That's what happens with idiot government intervention. It's the same reason why college costs have skyrocketed and why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. When the consumer and the business aren't the people paying or assuming the risk, then they become reckless. It is why the true free market is so flawless. As the consumer paying, I'm not going to pay too much or pay for what I don't need. As a bank with my ass on the line for the loan, I'm not going to make risky loans. I'm going to make very safe loans for small amounts of money to people with incredible credit history. It's only when socialism enters the picture and the consumer isn't paying and the business isn't taking the risk that everything falls apart. History has proven it and now Dumbocrats have proven it right here in the U.S.

It was speculation in the housing market. I saw the value of my house rise from $160,000 to almost $400,000 in a matter of months
People borrowed against this new found wealth and houses were repeatedly flipped for huge profit

It was greed not lending to poor people that caused the collapse

It was much more complicated than that, bub. Congress, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Executive Branch regulatory apparatus, Clinton, Wall Street, Realtors, ACORN, and yes, poor people and other people who chose to sign up for zero down loans.

Reckless Endangerment is the best analysis I've read to date on the matter.

You left Bush off that list

Color me surprised

I didn't present an exhaustive list, bub. The ratings agencies also played a huge role.

Color me unsurprised that you lack the intellectual curiosity to read something that doesn't conform to the view from your hardened leftwing bubble.

 

[P@triot]

You left Bush off that list. Color me surprised

You left off what policy or law Bush was behind that puts him on that list. Color me surprised...

 

[P@triot]

I know I will be called a racist, but I saw a recent poll on 'Morning Joe' that had 91% of the African-Americans voting for Hillary and 1% voting for Trump. No, not a typo! Hillary promises more free stuff and Trump promises more jobs. What does that mean?

It means, why should these lazy bastards work when the Minorities can collect Welfare for free; and the promise of jobs leads nowhere but Minimum Wage at 30 hours a week!

One of the qualifications for public assistance is that you have to either have a job or be a full time student.

If you had a job - why would you need public assistance?

 

[BlueGin]

I know I will be called a racist, but I saw a recent poll on 'Morning Joe' that had 91% of the African-Americans voting for Hillary and 1% voting for Trump. No, not a typo! Hillary promises more free stuff and Trump promises more jobs. What does that mean?

It means, why should these lazy bastards work when the Minorities can collect Welfare for free; and the promise of jobs leads nowhere but Minimum Wage at 30 hours a week!

One of the qualifications for public assistance is that you have to either have a job or be a full time student.

If you had a job - why would you need public assistance?

Single mothers (with kids) working below the poverty level.

 

[rightwinger]

Same old bullshit. Blame the Great Bush Recession of 2008 on those with the least amount of wealth. It was unchecked speculation that led us to disaster. The result of deregulation and lack of enforcement

I can tell by your response that you know I am right on this. And while I agree with you that "speculation" in the markets isn't helpful, it's beyond juvenile, asinine, and absurd to say "unchecked". How the fuck do you regulate opinion? How the fuck do you regulate rumors? Only an oppressive dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's could even begin to attempt to do something like that. If that's the world you want to live in - get the fuck out of the U.S. winger. Because we're not allowing that here in our country.

It wasn't Wall Street that started the collapse. It was the housing market. And that was the result of government intervention implementing socialism. When the banks were on the line for the money, they didn't make risky and reckless loans. When government was on the line for the money, the banks went crazy because it was free money falling from the sky for them.

That's what happens with idiot government intervention. It's the same reason why college costs have skyrocketed and why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. When the consumer and the business aren't the people paying or assuming the risk, then they become reckless. It is why the true free market is so flawless. As the consumer paying, I'm not going to pay too much or pay for what I don't need. As a bank with my ass on the line for the loan, I'm not going to make risky loans. I'm going to make very safe loans for small amounts of money to people with incredible credit history. It's only when socialism enters the picture and the consumer isn't paying and the business isn't taking the risk that everything falls apart. History has proven it and now Dumbocrats have proven it right here in the U.S.

It was speculation in the housing market. I saw the value of my house rise from $160,000 to almost $400,000 in a matter of months
People borrowed against this new found wealth and houses were repeatedly flipped for huge profit

It was greed not lending to poor people that caused the collapse

I think the whole thing was that people were unable to pay back their loans, MANY people, who were also encouraged to spend more than they could actually afford in reality. Not to mention the skimming off the top by the higher ups (and with that goes government kickbacks to turn their heads).

Let's follow the money

Somehow, conservatives blame the economic collapse on the 40% of the population that only controlled TWO TENTHS OF A PERCENT of the wealth in 2007

It was their greed that caused the Great Bush Recession of 2008

Color me skeptical

 

[BluesLegend]

I think it's corporations sucking the life out of us and our country. Jobs, wages and job security isn't what it used to be in my grandparents' days or even my parents' days. More poverty equals more problems, more crime, etc.

The corporation I work for treats me quite well thank you. But then I work hard I'm not some lame slacker.

It has nothing to do with being a slacker. The fact is that wages, job security and jobs themselves are not what they used to be. Besides, personal anecdotes don't count. Most of you people probably lie anyways.

I see so you broad brush corporations proving you know jack shit about corporations, typical 1970 left wing talking point. I give you an actual example of a modern corporation that treats their people like family and you choose denial because it doesn't fit your stupid talking point. Americans 100 best companies to work for, heard of it? Yeah I didn't think so. Here have one of these /EYEROLL

What example is that, the ones you make up in your head? Big multibillion dollar corporations are not your friend.

You are a mindless drone. I work for a large company with over 200,000 employees. My salary has increased every year for the last 20 years in a row, I make 571% more than I did when I started. Full benefits package, 2 retirement plans one fully funded by the company, 34 days off a year vacation plus holidays, unlimited sick time, short and long term disability, tuition reimbursement for advanced degrees, the list goes on and on. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[BluesLegend]

I think it's corporations sucking the life out of us and our country. Jobs, wages and job security isn't what it used to be in my grandparents' days or even my parents' days. More poverty equals more problems, more crime, etc.

The corporation I work for treats me quite well thank you. But then I work hard I'm not some lame slacker.

It has nothing to do with being a slacker. The fact is that wages, job security and jobs themselves are not what they used to be. Besides, personal anecdotes don't count. Most of you people probably lie anyways.

I see so you broad brush corporations proving you know jack shit about corporations, typical 1970 left wing talking point. I give you an actual example of a modern corporation that treats their people like family and you choose denial because it doesn't fit your stupid talking point. Americans 100 best companies to work for, heard of it? Yeah I didn't think so. Here have one of these /EYEROLL

Corporate ass kisser, peon.

lol your envy is noted lib.

 

[Divine Wind]

Welcome to 2016 America
All politicians are disliked and mistrusted. Cruz, Christie, McConnell, Boehnor all have huge negatives

The only popular politician is Obama with a whopping 53% approval

Agreed on 2016 America, slight disagreement on Obama:

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Barack Obama
Term average to date 47%