Nearly 1 in 5 Obamacare waivers go to restaurants, nightclubs, hotels in Pelosi

[Bfgrn]

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

Why are you right wingers so subservient to the opulent? Is your self esteem so low that you feel you must worship them? The 'we are not worthy' peasants for plutocrats...LOL

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

 

[Meister]

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

Why are you right wingers so subservient to the opulent? Is your self esteem so low that you feel you must worship them? The 'we are not worthy' peasants for plutocrats...LOL

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

I see that comprehension has never been your friend.

 

[daveman]

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

You have a right to life. It's up to you to take care of it. Why do you think other people should pay for the consequences of the choices you make?

Why are you right wingers so subservient to the opulent? Is your self esteem so low that you feel you must worship them? The 'we are not worthy' peasants for plutocrats...LOL

That's rich, coming from the guy who wants government to hold his hand from cradle to grave.

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

Yeah, yeah, and you have a solid gold yacht and a fur-lined helicopter, too.

Hint: Anyone can say anything on the internet.

 

[Bfgrn]

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

Why are you right wingers so subservient to the opulent? Is your self esteem so low that you feel you must worship them? The 'we are not worthy' peasants for plutocrats...LOL

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

I see that comprehension has never been your friend.

Care to join the conversation, or are you just going to hurl slurs from the peanut gallery?

 

[Bfgrn]

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

You have a right to life. It's up to you to take care of it. Why do you think other people should pay for the consequences of the choices you make?

Why are you right wingers so subservient to the opulent? Is your self esteem so low that you feel you must worship them? The 'we are not worthy' peasants for plutocrats...LOL

That's rich, coming from the guy who wants government to hold his hand from cradle to grave.

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

Yeah, yeah, and you have a solid gold yacht and a fur-lined helicopter, too.

Hint: Anyone can say anything on the internet.

Many diseases have nothing to do with how you take care of yourself and are out of your control. Why don't you just admit that you don't believe in rights, just privileges?

Conservatism has always tried to create an aristocracy in some form or other throughout the history on mankind. Why are you folks so afraid to stand up for what you believe?

 

[daveman]

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

You have a right to life. It's up to you to take care of it. Why do you think other people should pay for the consequences of the choices you make?

That's rich, coming from the guy who wants government to hold his hand from cradle to grave.

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

Yeah, yeah, and you have a solid gold yacht and a fur-lined helicopter, too.

Hint: Anyone can say anything on the internet.

Many diseases have nothing to do with how you take care of yourself and are out of your control. Why don't you just admit that you don't believe in rights, just privileges?

Conservatism has always tried to create an aristocracy in some form or other throughout the history on mankind. Why are you folks so afraid to stand up for what you believe?

I feel no obligation to defend the ideas your reliance on stereotypes instead of actual thinking says I believe.

Tell me, when you were making six figures, did you send extra money to the government over and above what you owed in taxes? Or were you still bleating that "the rich" should pay their "fair share"?

 

[Wry Catcher]

district...

So just how does this work again I thought you leftist pukes told us the NHC was thing to do better then brie and tea you said. Leaves me wondering why more are exempted then accepted.

Health Care Law | San Francisco | Nancy Pelosi | The Daily Caller

Why The Huge Spike In Healthcare Exemptions? | The Blaze

Gee Robert, I am sure you are a simple partisan hack, read simple as in stupid. Yet you've shown some ability to use half-truths and inuenndo rather well. I had no doubt you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer but believe your opinions were based solely on your lack of intelligence. Now though you've taken a step deeper into the dark side of deception for political purpose (sadly you still don't understand what you oppose, but that doesn't put you in an exclusive club either).

For those who believe my post is a simple ad hominem on someone with whom I disagree, look into the why of these exceptions. You will find that the reason is not as it seems. For the willfully ignorant go for it and give Robert the high fives and thanks in support of ignorance and propaganda, for an emotional high is so much easier to obtain than to engage in actual research.

 

[Bfgrn]

You have a right to life. It's up to you to take care of it. Why do you think other people should pay for the consequences of the choices you make?

That's rich, coming from the guy who wants government to hold his hand from cradle to grave.

Yeah, yeah, and you have a solid gold yacht and a fur-lined helicopter, too.

Hint: Anyone can say anything on the internet.

Many diseases have nothing to do with how you take care of yourself and are out of your control. Why don't you just admit that you don't believe in rights, just privileges?

Conservatism has always tried to create an aristocracy in some form or other throughout the history on mankind. Why are you folks so afraid to stand up for what you believe?

I feel no obligation to defend the ideas your reliance on stereotypes instead of actual thinking says I believe.

Tell me, when you were making six figures, did you send extra money to the government over and above what you owed in taxes? Or were you still bleating that "the rich" should pay their "fair share"?

Well, excuse me...

It's ironic you feel an obligation to tell me I want government to hold my hand from cradle to grave, but THAT is not stereotyping, right Einstein?

You chose the Constitution defense, but you still haven't shown where corporations are mentioned in the Constitution?

As a matter of FACT, the men who wrote the founding documents of our nation lived beyond those documents and actually governed. Why don't conservatives ever look at how they governed? Wouldn't that make clear how they interpreted those founding documents?

Our founding fathers clearly showed they believed corporations should be heavily regulated. They were ethical men who believed that if you make money from the citizens it was a privilege that could and was revoked. The service any corporation provide had to be of clear benefit to the citizens, and if they were harmed or swindled, owners and stockholders were held personally liable.

Conservatives today hold the citizens who are harmed and swindled personally responsible and defend the corporation's acts of malfeasance and a right...WHY is that?

 

[daveman]

Many diseases have nothing to do with how you take care of yourself and are out of your control. Why don't you just admit that you don't believe in rights, just privileges?

Conservatism has always tried to create an aristocracy in some form or other throughout the history on mankind. Why are you folks so afraid to stand up for what you believe?

I feel no obligation to defend the ideas your reliance on stereotypes instead of actual thinking says I believe.

Tell me, when you were making six figures, did you send extra money to the government over and above what you owed in taxes? Or were you still bleating that "the rich" should pay their "fair share"?

Well, excuse me...

It's ironic you feel an obligation to tell me I want government to hold my hand from cradle to grave, but THAT is not stereotyping, right Einstein?

You chose the Constitution defense, but you still haven't shown where corporations are mentioned in the Constitution?

As a matter of FACT, the men who wrote the founding documents of our nation lived beyond those documents and actually governed. Why don't conservatives ever look at how they governed? Wouldn't that make clear how they interpreted those founding documents?

Our founding fathers clearly showed they believed corporations should be heavily regulated. They were ethical men who believed that if you make money from the citizens it was a privilege that could and was revoked. The service any corporation provide had to be of clear benefit to the citizens, and if they were harmed or swindled, owners and stockholders were held personally liable.

Conservatives today hold the citizens who are harmed and swindled personally responsible and defend the corporation's acts of malfeasance and a right...WHY is that?

Can you show me a corporation that ISN'T heavily regulated?

You want the government to set maximum salaries for everyone, don't you?

 

[Bfgrn]

I feel no obligation to defend the ideas your reliance on stereotypes instead of actual thinking says I believe.

Tell me, when you were making six figures, did you send extra money to the government over and above what you owed in taxes? Or were you still bleating that "the rich" should pay their "fair share"?

Well, excuse me...

It's ironic you feel an obligation to tell me I want government to hold my hand from cradle to grave, but THAT is not stereotyping, right Einstein?

You chose the Constitution defense, but you still haven't shown where corporations are mentioned in the Constitution?

As a matter of FACT, the men who wrote the founding documents of our nation lived beyond those documents and actually governed. Why don't conservatives ever look at how they governed? Wouldn't that make clear how they interpreted those founding documents?

Our founding fathers clearly showed they believed corporations should be heavily regulated. They were ethical men who believed that if you make money from the citizens it was a privilege that could and was revoked. The service any corporation provide had to be of clear benefit to the citizens, and if they were harmed or swindled, owners and stockholders were held personally liable.

Conservatives today hold the citizens who are harmed and swindled personally responsible and defend the corporation's acts of malfeasance and a right...WHY is that?

Can you show me a corporation that ISN'T heavily regulated?

You want the government to set maximum salaries for everyone, don't you?

We just witnessed the crash of our economy and a catastrophic environmental disaster caused by years of deregulation and regulatory capture. It was caused by the private sector, not the government.

What a moron, you accuse me of stereotyping, when that is all you continue to do.

I don't want to limit anyone's ability to earn money and I don't have a problem with anyone making lots of money as long as they engage in ethical business practices. I only have a problem when they break the law or the rules of a free market and get rich by making other people poor.

 

[daveman]

Well, excuse me...

It's ironic you feel an obligation to tell me I want government to hold my hand from cradle to grave, but THAT is not stereotyping, right Einstein?

You chose the Constitution defense, but you still haven't shown where corporations are mentioned in the Constitution?

As a matter of FACT, the men who wrote the founding documents of our nation lived beyond those documents and actually governed. Why don't conservatives ever look at how they governed? Wouldn't that make clear how they interpreted those founding documents?

Our founding fathers clearly showed they believed corporations should be heavily regulated. They were ethical men who believed that if you make money from the citizens it was a privilege that could and was revoked. The service any corporation provide had to be of clear benefit to the citizens, and if they were harmed or swindled, owners and stockholders were held personally liable.

Conservatives today hold the citizens who are harmed and swindled personally responsible and defend the corporation's acts of malfeasance and a right...WHY is that?

Can you show me a corporation that ISN'T heavily regulated?

You want the government to set maximum salaries for everyone, don't you?

We just witnessed the crash of our economy and a catastrophic environmental disaster caused by years of deregulation and regulatory capture. It was caused by the private sector, not the government.

What a moron, you accuse me of stereotyping, when that is all you continue to do.

I don't want to limit anyone's ability to earn money and I don't have a problem with anyone making lots of money as long as they engage in ethical business practices. I only have a problem when they break the law or the rules of a free market and get rich by making other people poor.

"We just witnessed the crash of our economy and a catastrophic environmental disaster caused by years of deregulation and regulatory capture. It was caused by the private sector, not the government."

Really? The private sector was able to deregulate itself? The government had nothing to do with it?

Take your time. I can tell you haven't given this much thought.

"...I don't have a problem with anyone making lots of money..."

The quote in your signature proves otherwise.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why are the waivers being granted in the first place? What would happen if they were not granted?

The idea is that some providers are going to need more time to come into compliance.

Answer those questions and we will then discuss the other stuff you have wrong.

I've got nothing wrong. You're the shit for brains that was telling me a non-provider of health care would need to get a waiver.

You have nothing wrong? According to DHS the waivers are granted to if compliance with the interim final regulations would result in a significant decrease in access to benefits or a significant increase in premiums. Since Obamacare is supposed to ensure that neither of these things happens they are forced to use waivers to ensure the law works as advertised. For some reason some people believe that, if the waivers are stopped in 2014, everything will still be hunky dory, despite the fact that in San Francisco, where everyone has guaranteed low cost health insurance, the plan is already falling apart.

The waivers obviously serve a different purpose than advertised, and the process for approving them is not transparent. Until it is I will be forced to assume that something underhanded is going on. You cannot possibly prove that assumption wrong because the you do not have access to the information that would be required to prove it, if it exists at all.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

So 'life' is not a right, it's something you earn?

Why are you right wingers so subservient to the opulent? Is your self esteem so low that you feel you must worship them? The 'we are not worthy' peasants for plutocrats...LOL

BTW, as a heavy equipment salesman for Caterpillar, one of my monthly commission checks would equal or exceed your annual income.

No, but life is not something the government supplies either. Nor does it supply happiness or liberty.

This demonstrates the fundamental flaw with your attempt at logically linking one unalienable right mentioned in the Declaration of Independence with a governmental mandate to provide it. It also indicates why, despite the attempts of progressives to change the nature of the universe, rights do not come from the government. Rights are inherently part of us being alive, and the government exists only to take away rights in order to protect itself.

We need a government, but we also need to remember that the government is inherently inimical to our rights. The last thing any sane person wants is to put a right as fundamental as life in the hands of the government.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well, excuse me...

It's ironic you feel an obligation to tell me I want government to hold my hand from cradle to grave, but THAT is not stereotyping, right Einstein?

You chose the Constitution defense, but you still haven't shown where corporations are mentioned in the Constitution?

As a matter of FACT, the men who wrote the founding documents of our nation lived beyond those documents and actually governed. Why don't conservatives ever look at how they governed? Wouldn't that make clear how they interpreted those founding documents?

Our founding fathers clearly showed they believed corporations should be heavily regulated. They were ethical men who believed that if you make money from the citizens it was a privilege that could and was revoked. The service any corporation provide had to be of clear benefit to the citizens, and if they were harmed or swindled, owners and stockholders were held personally liable.

Conservatives today hold the citizens who are harmed and swindled personally responsible and defend the corporation's acts of malfeasance and a right...WHY is that?

Can you show me a corporation that ISN'T heavily regulated?

You want the government to set maximum salaries for everyone, don't you?

We just witnessed the crash of our economy and a catastrophic environmental disaster caused by years of deregulation and regulatory capture. It was caused by the private sector, not the government.

What a moron, you accuse me of stereotyping, when that is all you continue to do.

I don't want to limit anyone's ability to earn money and I don't have a problem with anyone making lots of money as long as they engage in ethical business practices. I only have a problem when they break the law or the rules of a free market and get rich by making other people poor.

No we did not. We witnessed the crash of our economy and a rather extensive disaster that is the direct result of government regulations and policies that could have easily been avoided by the private sector.

 

[Bfgrn]

Can you show me a corporation that ISN'T heavily regulated?

You want the government to set maximum salaries for everyone, don't you?

We just witnessed the crash of our economy and a catastrophic environmental disaster caused by years of deregulation and regulatory capture. It was caused by the private sector, not the government.

What a moron, you accuse me of stereotyping, when that is all you continue to do.

I don't want to limit anyone's ability to earn money and I don't have a problem with anyone making lots of money as long as they engage in ethical business practices. I only have a problem when they break the law or the rules of a free market and get rich by making other people poor.

No we did not. We witnessed the crash of our economy and a rather extensive disaster that is the direct result of government regulations and policies that could have easily been avoided by the private sector.

Here is where we have a problem. You folks on the right don't even know what happened and why. The financial meltdown of our economy was not because OF regulations, it was caused by DEregulation, regulatory capture (corporations writing regulations for their benefit) and the circumventing of existing regulations.

It had nothing to do with low and middle income people buying a home.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We just witnessed the crash of our economy and a catastrophic environmental disaster caused by years of deregulation and regulatory capture. It was caused by the private sector, not the government.

What a moron, you accuse me of stereotyping, when that is all you continue to do.

I don't want to limit anyone's ability to earn money and I don't have a problem with anyone making lots of money as long as they engage in ethical business practices. I only have a problem when they break the law or the rules of a free market and get rich by making other people poor.

No we did not. We witnessed the crash of our economy and a rather extensive disaster that is the direct result of government regulations and policies that could have easily been avoided by the private sector.

Here is where we have a problem. You folks on the right don't even know what happened and why. The financial meltdown of our economy was not because OF regulations, it was caused by DEregulation, regulatory capture (corporations writing regulations for their benefit) and the circumventing of existing regulations.

It had nothing to do with low and middle income people buying a home.

I bet I do understand what happened.

The housing bubble burst because unsustainable practices were encouraged. Regulations used to require that banks show that they were carrying enough collateral to offset their loans, that usually meant that banks would require at least 30% down on any mortgage.

This caused a hardship in some neighborhoods, and Congress was lobbied to encourage banks to make more loans to traditionally lower income/minority groups. In order to accomplish this they had to change the laws about collateral. This helped create the housing bubble larger because there was no way a bank could possibly offer a high risk borrower a 0 down mortgage without offering the same deal to other customers with good credit. If they did this they would have lost the better customers because of unfair and preferential treatment to others.

So, in a way, you are correct that this was the fault of deregulation, but the complete truth is that regulations that encouraged the behavior that you point out is not the main cause of the crisis actually went all the way up the pay scale, and everyone took advantage of loan policies that were meant to encourage home ownership by minorities. These polices are the direct result of government interventions and regulations.

Want to tell me again this is not the governments fault?

 

[Bfgrn]

No we did not. We witnessed the crash of our economy and a rather extensive disaster that is the direct result of government regulations and policies that could have easily been avoided by the private sector.

Here is where we have a problem. You folks on the right don't even know what happened and why. The financial meltdown of our economy was not because OF regulations, it was caused by DEregulation, regulatory capture (corporations writing regulations for their benefit) and the circumventing of existing regulations.

It had nothing to do with low and middle income people buying a home.

I bet I do understand what happened.

The housing bubble burst because unsustainable practices were encouraged. Regulations used to require that banks show that they were carrying enough collateral to offset their loans, that usually meant that banks would require at least 30% down on any mortgage.

This caused a hardship in some neighborhoods, and Congress was lobbied to encourage banks to make more loans to traditionally lower income/minority groups. In order to accomplish this they had to change the laws about collateral. This helped create the housing bubble larger because there was no way a bank could possibly offer a high risk borrower a 0 down mortgage without offering the same deal to other customers with good credit. If they did this they would have lost the better customers because of unfair and preferential treatment to others.

So, in a way, you are correct that this was the fault of deregulation, but the complete truth is that regulations that encouraged the behavior that you point out is not the main cause of the crisis actually went all the way up the pay scale, and everyone took advantage of loan policies that were meant to encourage home ownership by minorities. These polices are the direct result of government interventions and regulations.

Want to tell me again this is not the governments fault?

It was not the government's fault. Unless you blame government for being corrupted by corporate lobbyists and allowing corporate lawyers to craft laws, write regulatory rules and capture regulatory agencies. But that is not the agenda of liberals, it is the agenda of conservatives, the Republican party, the right wing ideologues on the Supreme Court and all their wealthy backers. They believe THAT is government's function; to protect the corporations.

 

[Jarhead]

Here is where we have a problem. You folks on the right don't even know what happened and why. The financial meltdown of our economy was not because OF regulations, it was caused by DEregulation, regulatory capture (corporations writing regulations for their benefit) and the circumventing of existing regulations.

It had nothing to do with low and middle income people buying a home.

I bet I do understand what happened.

The housing bubble burst because unsustainable practices were encouraged. Regulations used to require that banks show that they were carrying enough collateral to offset their loans, that usually meant that banks would require at least 30% down on any mortgage.

This caused a hardship in some neighborhoods, and Congress was lobbied to encourage banks to make more loans to traditionally lower income/minority groups. In order to accomplish this they had to change the laws about collateral. This helped create the housing bubble larger because there was no way a bank could possibly offer a high risk borrower a 0 down mortgage without offering the same deal to other customers with good credit. If they did this they would have lost the better customers because of unfair and preferential treatment to others.

So, in a way, you are correct that this was the fault of deregulation, but the complete truth is that regulations that encouraged the behavior that you point out is not the main cause of the crisis actually went all the way up the pay scale, and everyone took advantage of loan policies that were meant to encourage home ownership by minorities. These polices are the direct result of government interventions and regulations.

Want to tell me again this is not the governments fault?

It was not the government's fault. Unless you blame government for being corrupted by corporate lobbyists and allowing corporate lawyers to craft laws, write regulatory rules and capture regulatory agencies. But that is not the agenda of liberals, it is the agenda of conservatives, the Republican party, the right wing ideologues on the Supreme Court and all their wealthy backers. They believe THAT is government's function; to protect the corporations.

That is spin.

Conservatives and the GOP overall believe that Government should not be incolved in implementing policies that have a direct negative affect on capitalsim....

The GOP is attrempting to protect capitalism from Government.

Curious...what you did was spin the intent of the GOP and Conservatives. Why did you feel the need to do that? Are you concerned that without the spin, the intentions of the GOP may come acorss as valid?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Here is where we have a problem. You folks on the right don't even know what happened and why. The financial meltdown of our economy was not because OF regulations, it was caused by DEregulation, regulatory capture (corporations writing regulations for their benefit) and the circumventing of existing regulations.

It had nothing to do with low and middle income people buying a home.

I bet I do understand what happened.

The housing bubble burst because unsustainable practices were encouraged. Regulations used to require that banks show that they were carrying enough collateral to offset their loans, that usually meant that banks would require at least 30% down on any mortgage.

This caused a hardship in some neighborhoods, and Congress was lobbied to encourage banks to make more loans to traditionally lower income/minority groups. In order to accomplish this they had to change the laws about collateral. This helped create the housing bubble larger because there was no way a bank could possibly offer a high risk borrower a 0 down mortgage without offering the same deal to other customers with good credit. If they did this they would have lost the better customers because of unfair and preferential treatment to others.

So, in a way, you are correct that this was the fault of deregulation, but the complete truth is that regulations that encouraged the behavior that you point out is not the main cause of the crisis actually went all the way up the pay scale, and everyone took advantage of loan policies that were meant to encourage home ownership by minorities. These polices are the direct result of government interventions and regulations.

Want to tell me again this is not the governments fault?

It was not the government's fault. Unless you blame government for being corrupted by corporate lobbyists and allowing corporate lawyers to craft laws, write regulatory rules and capture regulatory agencies. But that is not the agenda of liberals, it is the agenda of conservatives, the Republican party, the right wing ideologues on the Supreme Court and all their wealthy backers. They believe THAT is government's function; to protect the corporations.

Please tell me you're not serious....

 

[Bfgrn]

I bet I do understand what happened.

The housing bubble burst because unsustainable practices were encouraged. Regulations used to require that banks show that they were carrying enough collateral to offset their loans, that usually meant that banks would require at least 30% down on any mortgage.

This caused a hardship in some neighborhoods, and Congress was lobbied to encourage banks to make more loans to traditionally lower income/minority groups. In order to accomplish this they had to change the laws about collateral. This helped create the housing bubble larger because there was no way a bank could possibly offer a high risk borrower a 0 down mortgage without offering the same deal to other customers with good credit. If they did this they would have lost the better customers because of unfair and preferential treatment to others.

So, in a way, you are correct that this was the fault of deregulation, but the complete truth is that regulations that encouraged the behavior that you point out is not the main cause of the crisis actually went all the way up the pay scale, and everyone took advantage of loan policies that were meant to encourage home ownership by minorities. These polices are the direct result of government interventions and regulations.

Want to tell me again this is not the governments fault?

It was not the government's fault. Unless you blame government for being corrupted by corporate lobbyists and allowing corporate lawyers to craft laws, write regulatory rules and capture regulatory agencies. But that is not the agenda of liberals, it is the agenda of conservatives, the Republican party, the right wing ideologues on the Supreme Court and all their wealthy backers. They believe THAT is government's function; to protect the corporations.

That is spin.

Conservatives and the GOP overall believe that Government should not be incolved in implementing policies that have a direct negative affect on capitalsim....

The GOP is attrempting to protect capitalism from Government.

Curious...what you did was spin the intent of the GOP and Conservatives. Why did you feel the need to do that? Are you concerned that without the spin, the intentions of the GOP may come acorss as valid?

I really wish it were spin JH. But you have unwittingly confirmed that it is fact and in direct conflict with what our founding fathers intended or practiced.

Conservatives love to use the 'show me where in the Constitution' argument. So show me where in the Constitution, Federalist papers, any of our founding documents or examples of governance where our founding fathers ever mentioned 'protect capitalism' as their goals.