#OWS Signs

[Dragon]

If I make him dance for it, I'm a job-creator.

Actually, no, if you're going to make that analogy accurate. Because you won't make him dance for it unless someone is paying you MORE than that dollar to see him dance.

In that case, it's more accurate to call the person who's paying YOU for the dance the job creator. You're just the middleman.

 

[Synthaholic]

Too be fair, most people never learned critical thinking skills so can only trot out tired, knee-jerk sayings.

Indeed.

Of course you are going to only showcase the crazies and the anti-Semites and then claim that it represents everyone at #OWS.

It's your modus operandi.

 

[Synthaholic]

If I give a homeless man a dollar, I'm a Conservative. If I make him dance for it, I'm a job-creator."
If I make someone else give him the dollar Im a liberal.

The bolded part makes no sense.

 

[Liability]

If I give a homeless man a dollar, I'm a Conservative. If I make him dance for it, I'm a job-creator."
If I make someone else give him the dollar Im a liberal.

The bolded part makes no sense.

The entire thing makes sense.

You couldn't understand.

It's all floating far above your meager capacity for such things.

 

[Toro]

One sign I saw at Occupy Vancouver was "I don't want to eat you," or something like that.

 

[Ravi]

Do they still have 9/11 was an inside job plastered all over Vancouver?

 

[Toro]

Do they still have 9/11 was an inside job plastered all over Vancouver?

I didn't see it.

But I did see a couple of guys with "End the Fed" signs.

I wanted to say, "Dood, you're in Canada. You know there is no Fed here, right?"

 

[Charles_Main]

It probably should have read

. I did not read my contract and got a house way above what I can afford. Why dont you just forgive my loans so I can get this house for free

I wonder if she knows that the Government encouraged that practice, They gave Freddy and Fanny the idea in the first place.

Miss placed rage.

 

[Ravi]

Do they still have 9/11 was an inside job plastered all over Vancouver?

I didn't see it.

But I did see a couple of guys with "End the Fed" signs.

I wanted to say, "Dood, you're in Canada. You know there is no Fed here, right?"

It's hard not to love Vancouverites.

 

[Charles_Main]

If I give a homeless man a dollar, I'm a Conservative. If I make him dance for it, I'm a job-creator."
If I make someone else give him the dollar Im a liberal.

The bolded part makes no sense.

Actually it makes perfect sense. Study after study proves that Conservatives give far more to Charity than Liberals. Liberals like to pretend it does not count because much of it is to Christian Charities, but believe me Christian Charities feed a lot of Homeless people.

 

[McDowell's]

if I buy a house and I don't use a real estate agent but the person am buying from does use a real estate agent, that real estate agent still has an obligation to tell me everything that is relevant to the transaction. If they know something negative about the house and fail to disclose it, they can lose their license even though they're not working for me. And I'm not talking about something that would fall under the home inspectors area.

And they have zero obligation to negotiate the best deal possible with the seller on your behalf. Again, having the basic duty of being truthful in factual representation is not the same as being obligated to pursue your interests. The seller's agent has no obligation to come to you and say "I know you think this deal is good, but they'll take 5000 less if you play hardball." In fact, they would be breaching their fiduciary relationship with the seller if they did that.

But getting the best deal is not and was never the issue with these mortgages. It's a disclosure issue.

I never said it was. I was working with your imperfect analogy. Your assertion has been that the lending agent should act in a similar manner to a doctor or other professional who you hire - giving expert advice and acting in your best interest. That's not the relationship of a lending agent to the borrower. The borrower is not paying for the lending agent to give expert advice. The borrower is paying for the costs associated with the service of lending capital. Part of that cost is the lending agent doing due diligence on behalf of the LENDER.

If you were arguing that all the lending agent should have to do is give full disclosure on the terms of the agreement, then I could see your point. However, the person who signs the loan agreement has an equal obligation to read what they are signing and understand it. If they are incapable of doing that, they should hire an expert to assist them. That expert is not and should not be the lending agent as they are already obligated to represent the best interest of the lender.

 

[Charles_Main]

And they have zero obligation to negotiate the best deal possible with the seller on your behalf. Again, having the basic duty of being truthful in factual representation is not the same as being obligated to pursue your interests. The seller's agent has no obligation to come to you and say "I know you think this deal is good, but they'll take 5000 less if you play hardball." In fact, they would be breaching their fiduciary relationship with the seller if they did that.

But getting the best deal is not and was never the issue with these mortgages. It's a disclosure issue.

I never said it was. I was working with your imperfect analogy. Your assertion has been that the lending agent should act in a similar manner to a doctor or other professional who you hire - giving expert advice and acting in your best interest. That's not the relationship of a lending agent to the borrower. The borrower is not paying for the lending agent to give expert advice. The borrower is paying for the costs associated with the service of lending capital. Part of that cost is the lending agent doing due diligence on behalf of the LENDER.

That is why if you are real smart you would have an accountant or Lawyer take a look at it before signing. Something as important as a mortgage that you will be paying for 30 years you should be able to afford the couple hundred bucks it would Take to have an expert look over the contract before you sign.

Most people are just to lazy to even read the fine print, let alone take it to an expert. If you are going into a situation like getting a loan for a home, and you think the bank Representative is going to read you every little bit of Fine Print, Think again.

 

[Gallagher]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfEBPtZZQBQ]Blackford the Cat with OWS Protest Sign - YouTube[/ame]

 

[daveman]

So if a doctor tells you you are fine, then you find out that he should have seen your cancer, it's your fault?

Are you saying people don't have the intelligence to determine if they can afford a certain payment each month?

Certainly some people don't.

Then they shouldn't be buying houses, should they?

But whatever you do, don't hold people accountable for their actions.

 

[daveman]

And if people hadn't signed mortgages they couldn't afford, what would have happened?

There wouldn't have been a pile of bad mortgages to sell, would there?

True. However, and rather more to the point, if piles of mortgage-backed securities hadn't been sold, and people HAD signed mortgages that failed, the impact on the economy would have been minimal.

It's clear what actually caused the melt-down.

Yes. People buying houses they couldn't afford.

But that doesn't blame BIG BANK, so it's not Approved Leftist Thought.

 

[daveman]

Too be fair, most people never learned critical thinking skills so can only trot out tired, knee-jerk sayings.

Indeed.

Of course you are going to only showcase the crazies and the anti-Semites and then claim that it represents everyone at #OWS.

It's your modus operandi.

Did I say that? Hint: No, I didn't.

But I haven't seen much in the way of critical thinking skills from the OWS crowd. Or you, for that matter.

 

[daveman]

If I give a homeless man a dollar, I'm a Conservative. If I make him dance for it, I'm a job-creator."
If I make someone else give him the dollar Im a liberal.

The bolded part makes no sense.

Conservatives donate more to charity than liberals. So it makes perfect sense.

 

[Synthaholic]

Are you saying people don't have the intelligence to determine if they can afford a certain payment each month?

Certainly some people don't.

Then they shouldn't be buying houses, should they?

But whatever you do, don't hold people accountable for their actions.

Are you saying that the percentage of people who were too stupid to be buying a house are responsible for the financial crisis of 2008?

Or do you not know what you are saying?

 

[Synthaholic]

Indeed.

Of course you are going to only showcase the crazies and the anti-Semites and then claim that it represents everyone at #OWS.

It's your modus operandi.

Did I say that? Hint: No, I didn't.

But I haven't seen much in the way of critical thinking skills from the OWS crowd. Or you, for that matter.

Then why are you highlighting these signs?

 

[Synthaholic]

If I give a homeless man a dollar, I'm a Conservative. If I make him dance for it, I'm a job-creator."
If I make someone else give him the dollar Im a liberal.

The bolded part makes no sense.

Conservatives donate more to charity than liberals. So it makes perfect sense.

Let's see: there is you, a fringe wingnut, linking to George Will, Republican opinion-giver, who doesn't back up his assertions, who cites Arthur C. Brooks, who he deceptively only refers to as "a professor at Syracuse University" without telling his readers that Brooks is the rightwing PRESIDENT of the American Enterprise Institute, a wingnut think tank.

Who the fuck do you think you are fooling?