US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

[Rshermr]

Noe that is complete desperation when you have to go back 40 years to avoid blaming Bush for the Bush Housing Crash!!!

As with most things in Washington...it's a progression of legislation that creates the biggest problems. My point was that for you on the left to claim that Bush and the GOP are solely responsible for the economic melt down that occurred ignores things that Democratic Presidents like Carter and Clinton signed into law on THEIR watch! That isn't "desperation"...that's "reality"!

You would think that blaming Carter and a 40 year old law would be a clue to you of how ridiculous you look. But since all you care about is blaming Democrats, I guess you don't care about looking ridiculous.

If I'd only blamed Carter...as you and Rshermr ONLY blame Bush then yes I WOULD look ridiculous! I didn't do that though...did I? I showed how a progression of legislation passed by both Democrats and Republicans brought us to the point where a real estate bubble and crash did severe damage to US financial institutions!

What's "ridiculous" is to only blame one President who happened to be in office when the crash took place...a President who DID caution others that there was a problem looming!

Oh. Just happened to be. For eight years. And did nothing while the economy cratered. But it was not his fault???? Nice try, me boy, but you are supposed to be a history major. That does not give you a right to modify history.

Bush is the President who gave us TARP which is the one policy that actually DID prevent the economy from "cratering". You'd grasp that concept if you really DID know anything about economics or what took place during that economic meltdown! Bush is also the only President who warned that what we were doing with housing, Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac was dangerous for our financial institutions. You didn't hear that from Carter, Reagan, HW Bush or Clinton.

Noe that is complete desperation when you have to go back 40 years to avoid blaming Bush for the Bush Housing Crash!!!

As with most things in Washington...it's a progression of legislation that creates the biggest problems. My point was that for you on the left to claim that Bush and the GOP are solely responsible for the economic melt down that occurred ignores things that Democratic Presidents like Carter and Clinton signed into law on THEIR watch! That isn't "desperation"...that's "reality"!

You would think that blaming Carter and a 40 year old law would be a clue to you of how ridiculous you look. But since all you care about is blaming Democrats, I guess you don't care about looking ridiculous.

If I'd only blamed Carter...as you and Rshermr ONLY blame Bush then yes I WOULD look ridiculous! I didn't do that though...did I? I showed how a progression of legislation passed by both Democrats and Republicans brought us to the point where a real estate bubble and crash did severe damage to US financial institutions!

What's "ridiculous" is to only blame one President who happened to be in office when the crash took place...a President who DID caution others that there was a problem looming!

Oh. Just happened to be. For eight years. And did nothing while the economy cratered. But it was not his fault???? Nice try, me boy, but you are supposed to be a history major. That does not give you a right to modify history.

Bush is the President who gave us TARP which is the one policy that actually DID prevent the economy from "cratering". You'd grasp that concept if you really DID know anything about economics or what took place during that economic meltdown! Bush is also the only President who warned that what we were doing with housing, Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac was dangerous for our financial institutions. You didn't hear that from Carter, Reagan, HW Bush or Clinton.

Me boy, you are too stupid. You are not making an economic argument, but an argument of history. A fuller description of the tarp issue would include why it was needed. By October of 2008 the Great Republican Recession of 2008 was in full swing. That something needed to be done was obvious, to republicans and democrats in congress. The vote on TARP in October of 2008 was heavily supported by democrats and oppose by republicans. Republican congressmen voted against it 108 to 91. It was then supported heavily enough by democrats to pass. And the banks were saved. However, where you get the idea that saving the banks helped the economy in any real way is typical of you. The best part of tarp, from the aspect of slowing the recession, was the impact of the money provided GM and Chrysler. They would have been gone without those loans, but were saved with well beyond a million jobs, as a result of it.
You need to understand what a demand based recession is, and what to do about it. Since you are such a stellar student of economics should make that simple, me boy. Or you could go back to the history of R. Reagan to find out what worked for him after his spending cuts required by tax reductions cratered the economy.

 

[Rshermr]

Noe that is complete desperation when you have to go back 40 years to avoid blaming Bush for the Bush Housing Crash!!!

As with most things in Washington...it's a progression of legislation that creates the biggest problems. My point was that for you on the left to claim that Bush and the GOP are solely responsible for the economic melt down that occurred ignores things that Democratic Presidents like Carter and Clinton signed into law on THEIR watch! That isn't "desperation"...that's "reality"!

You would think that blaming Carter and a 40 year old law would be a clue to you of how ridiculous you look. But since all you care about is blaming Democrats, I guess you don't care about looking ridiculous.

If I'd only blamed Carter...as you and Rshermr ONLY blame Bush then yes I WOULD look ridiculous! I didn't do that though...did I? I showed how a progression of legislation passed by both Democrats and Republicans brought us to the point where a real estate bubble and crash did severe damage to US financial institutions!

What's "ridiculous" is to only blame one President who happened to be in office when the crash took place...a President who DID caution others that there was a problem looming!

Oh. Just happened to be. For eight years. And did nothing while the economy cratered. But it was not his fault???? Nice try, me boy, but you are supposed to be a history major. That does not give you a right to modify history.

Bush is the President who gave us TARP which is the one policy that actually DID prevent the economy from "cratering". You'd grasp that concept if you really DID know anything about economics or what took place during that economic meltdown! Bush is also the only President who warned that what we were doing with housing, Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac was dangerous for our financial institutions. You didn't hear that from Carter, Reagan, HW Bush or Clinton.

Proving you are a con tool, you make it sound like bush was trying to do something about his economic disaster. He was doing little. He saved a number of banks, made most richer than ever, but did little else. Nearly nothing. He was not part of the stimulus package, or any other economic effort to stop the disaster that was his. What saved us from a new Republican Depression was the Stimulus program, primarily And nothing else. There were exactly zero bills put forward by the republicans, but multiple efforts at stoping any bills put forward by the president.
There was, me boy, exactly one remaining effort to speed up the effects of the recession. And republicans voted against that effort every single time and with every single republican congressman voting to stop progress.

 

[Rshermr]

It didn't matter if all the Republicans voted against Obama's original stimulus because he had the Democratic votes to push it through regardless...just as he did with ObamaCare!

The second stimulus that Barry asked for...he couldn't even sell to his fellow Democrats! That's how bad the first stimulus was at creating jobs.

What a fucking rightard you are. You have no shame at all, do ya?

It's a flat out lie to state Republicans could not have blocked passage of the ARRA just as it's a lie to pretend they were helpless to stop it just like they couldn't stop ObamaCare, which was passed with a filibuster-proof Senate.

To say Republicans COULD have stopped Obamacare is just plain foolish.

As you well know, Lame Duck President used bribery, payoffs and most likely blackmail along with rules changes to shove Obamacare up our...throats.

For the life of me, I'll never understand what the fuck is wrong with you rightards. I never said Republicans could have stopped Obamacare. Where do you come up with this shit? How does your brain translate what I wrote into what you wrote?

So you admit that the GOP couldn't stop ObamaCare...but you claim that they COULD stop the Obama Stimulus? Come on, Faun...just admit that stimulus was basically written behind closed doors by Harry and Nancy...and that the reason it was such a flop was that it turned into a liberal "pork fest" that rewarded liberal donors, liberal causes and the public sector employees that support Democrats. If you were an American Private Sector worker either laid off because of the recession or worried that you might be laid off...there was little in the Obama Stimulus that was going to help you.

Wow. Only a con tool could make that post. The stimulus had lots of input by republicans. Every tax reduction, and there were billions of dollars in tax reductions, came from republicans. What then happened, of course, was that EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN VOTED AGAINST THE STIMULUS.
Now, we could either listen to your cut and paste efforts from bat shit crazy conservative web sites and fox, or we could listen to the cbo. Faun is simply stating what they said, as would I. The only thing you can do to turn around an aggregate demand based recession (which this recession was) at that point was STIMULUS. Period. And the small, and partially mangled by republicans, stimulus was not sufficient to do the job well. And republicans passed NO bills to help. None. Yet the stimulus, according to the cbo, WORKED. It turned the economy around, brought unemployment to near nothing. And there you are, out in a small island with your con friends, hollering it did not work. It is really getting pretty lonesome out there, me boy.
So, where was that Republican bill to help with the great republican recession of 2008??? Oh yeah, it did not and does not exist. Which is why, me boy, the congress from 2010 until today has been named THE DO NOTHING CONGRESS.
Oh, and if you were a private sector employee, what the republican congress did held NO interest for you. And since most of the 14,000 new jobs created under the obama admin were PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS, you are wrong again. As I am sure you knew.

 

[Rshermr]

Opinion? Yes, me boy, thanks for admitting that it is your opinion. Lies and your stated opinion. Now that shows a total lack of substance. If all you have to bring forward is opinion, then you have nothing to post about. My opinion is that you are a dipshit. That does not make you a liar. What makes you a liar is that you made up something untrue that was easy to prove was untrue. You know, me boy, that old Chicago School statement of yours, posted a hundred times by now, is a proven lie on your part.
Again, I do not lie ever. I know that is frustrating for you. But making things up shows a total lack of integrity on your part.

You can SAY that you never lie as many times as you want, Rshermr but it won't change the fact that you've exhibited none of the knowledge about economics that one would expect from an economics major! Not knowing what The Chicago School was...was your George Costanza moment. You tried to pretend that you are something you're obviously not...and when someone who had only basic knowledge of the subject asked you a question that ever Econ major on the planet should have been able to answer EASILY...you completely whiffed on it!

But oldstyle, me boy, you must feel just terrible. Being caught lying, especially about something so simple as telling everyone you said to me something about the Chicago School Of Economics, and then to have it proven to be a lie. And then to have to go on, saying the same thing, when anyone who followed the posts, know you are a lier.
But no, it is just sop for you, oldstyle. Lie, get caught, lie again, get caught. Imagine now boring it must be for the rest of the people who post on this board to be honest, and to discus the topics.

Lie, get caught, lie again, get caught...that pretty much sums up you on this board, Rshermr! We both know you didn't have a clue what The Chicago School was back then and we both know you'd LOVE a do over on that lie. It's what happens to people like you who embellish their lives...sooner or later you get caught. With you it didn't take long because you're SO fucking clueless when it comes to economics.

I know, oldstyle, you are so upset that I do not lie. You say I did not know what you were talking about when you say you said Chicago Schol, but then I proved that you did not Say Chicago School. Which would mean, to a rational person, that you wee LYING. Again. Sorry, you are, me boy, daught lying again.

I'm not upset that you lie...I'm amused by how pathetic you are that you feel the NEED to lie!

No, no, no, me poor ignorant con. You are upset because I do not lie. Like you lie. Like you have lied over a hundred times when you said you posted Chicago School of Economics and I did not know what you meant. Because, of course, though you have now said that over 100 times, you did not in fact post anything about the Chicago School of Economics. Ever. Except over 100 times when you said I did not know what it was. That is, me poor ignorant dishonest lying con tool, over 100 separate lies.
Now, if you are proud of the number of lies you can post, there you go. Most of us do not lie. Lying shows NO integrity. So sorry for you, me boy.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I can see why.

My neighbor works 4 part time jobs - trying to make up the income of the full time job lost to Obamacare...

See, 4 jobs on the books instead of 1.

Thanks Obama...

 

[Rshermr]

the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977

Noe that is complete desperation when you have to go back 40 years to avoid blaming Bush for the Bush Housing Crash!!!

Here are some FACTS for you, much as I know they are offensive to you.

Democrats actions leading to Mortgage Collapse B.B.

From New York Times
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending


From Bloomberg News
How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0


The Administration’s Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs, ie Fannie, Freddie etc.)
Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs


Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Democrats of Financial Crisis; Meltdown



The Wall Street Journal Barney’s Rubble
Barney's Rubble


Mashup of Maxine Waters & Barney Frank - Then Vs. Now

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

The Bet That Blew Up Wall Street
Steve Kroft On Credit Default Swaps And Their Central Role In The Unfolding Economic Crisis
The Bet That Blew Up Wall Street


Bush Called For Reform 17 Times In 2008 ALONE, here dating back to 2001! Duplicate of Whitehouse.archives http://sweetness-light.com/archive/bush-called-for-reform-17-times-in-2008#.UrzlU3l3vIU

Another bat shit crazy con web site, Sweetness and Light

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

oldstyle is a paid con troll. He gets his points from his bat shit crazy con web sites, and nutcase con bosses, and posts the "information" as though it is true. He knows many will want to believe him because they too are cons. And that is what cons get their beliefs from. They believe what they are told as long as they WANT to believe it. The rest, he assumes, will not bother disputing his dogma. But when challenged over and over, he will revert to personal attacks. Just the wy it is.

You mean just as you are using a personal attack here? Just asking.

Rshermr resorts to personal attacks here because invariably he gets caught up in the bullshit stories he tells here...like how he taught college level economics classes as an undergrad...but didn't know what I was referring to when I asked him what economic school he was basing his theory on. When you catch him in a lie...he doesn't have enough sense to tuck tail...he'll attack you personally by accusing you of being a "dishwasher" or a "paid troll" or both which simply illustrates how clueless he really is. How many dishwashers do you know that are paid to post on politics?

Ah, a lie. Like when you have said over 100 times that you posted about the chicago school of economics, and I did not understand. Which, me boy, is untrue, B

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

Market Expert: Jobless Recovery in 2011

Fox Business??? Really. Just a minute, I'l go get a link to some lame left wing web site, me boy. Ever try an impartial site.
2011, looking at recovery in 2010 and earlier. Did you think that says anything about the recovery overall.
Really, your agenda is showing.

The link Oldstyle gave to that Fox Business video provides excellent proof how Fox lies to their audience and literally dumbs them down.

In this case, we see Oldstyle mindlessly referring to a video Fox purports they aired on May 5th, 2011. But in reality, it aired in November, 6th, 2009.

Oldstyle, being the ever diligent idiot he is, doesn't even bother to review the very evidence he provides as proof to establish his insane claims.

oldstyle is a paid con troll. He gets his points from his bat shit crazy con web sites, and nutcase con bosses, and posts the "information" as though it is true. He knows many will want to believe him because they too are cons. And that is what cons get their beliefs from. They believe what they are told as long as they WANT to believe it. The rest, he assumes, will not bother disputing his dogma. But when challenged over and over, he will revert to personal attacks. Just the wy it is.

You mean just as you are using a personal attack here? Just asking.

Rshermr resorts to personal attacks here because invariably he gets caught up in the bullshit stories he tells here...like how he taught college level economics classes as an undergrad...but didn't know what I was referring to when I asked him what economic school he was basing his theory on. When you catch him in a lie...he doesn't have enough sense to tuck tail...he'll attack you personally by accusing you of being a "dishwasher" or a "paid troll" or both which simply illustrates how clueless he really is. How many dishwashers do you know that are paid to post on politics?[/

And yes...I exposed you as a poser YEARS ago...did you think that my opinion of you would change since? You're still here claiming to be something that you quite obviously ARE NOT!

Opinion? Yes, me boy, thanks for admitting that it is your opinion. Lies and your stated opinion. Now that shows a total lack of substance. If all you have to bring forward is opinion, then you have nothing to post about. My opinion is that you are a dipshit. That does not make you a liar. What makes you a liar is that you made up something untrue that was easy to prove was untrue. You know, me boy, that old Chicago School statement of yours, posted a hundred times by now, is a proven lie on your part.
Again, I do not lie ever. I know that is frustrating for you. But making things up shows a total lack of integrity on your part.

You can SAY that you never lie as many times as you want, Rshermr but it won't change the fact that you've exhibited none of the knowledge about economics that one would expect from an economics major! Not knowing what The Chicago School was...was your George Costanza moment. You tried to pretend that you are something you're obviously not...and when someone who had only basic knowledge of the subject asked you a question that ever Econ major on the planet should have been able to answer EASILY...you completely whiffed on it!

It would be up to you to prove that I lie. The fact that you say you have done so is another lie. You can not, and did not, because I never lie. Now the fact that you say I whiffed on a statement about the chicago School is a lie. You did not, as you know, ever post a statement about the chicago school. Though you have said you did over 100 times.
So, since you say you did, over and over and over, provide the post number and the date and the thread name you say your post was in. My bet is you will simply keep making your claim, a complete lie. Because, me boy, the post you claim you made is not out there. Dipshit.

 

[Rshermr]

I can see why.

My neighbor works 4 part time jobs - trying to make up the income of the full time job lost to Obamacare...

See, 4 jobs on the books instead of 1.

Thanks Obama...

I can see why.

My neighbor works 4 part time jobs - trying to make up the income of the full time job lost to Obamacare...

See, 4 jobs on the books instead of 1.

Thanks Obama...

Your neighbor is caught in the unemployment problem from the Great Republican Recession of 2008. Now, since that recession was handed over to the obama economic team, the rate of unemployment has gone from 10% to 5%, which is a REALLY< REALLY low rate. If your neighbor is having issues getting a job, it probably makes sense to not blame the person who has been making every effort to make unemployment better. But, it is a free world.
What is it that Republicans did to help the economy? They have owned congress for going on 6 years, so they could do something if they cared about people like your neighbor. The very wealthy, who they do indeed care about, have gotten much richer.

 

[Rshermr]

When did I ever claim that the GOP attempted to pass legislation to address Bush's concerns? Republicans in Congress did as little as the Democrats did!

That doesn't change the fact that the fiscal meltdown can be traced to several key pieces of legislation...one of which was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 which Jimmy Carter signed into being. Bill Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act into being which did away with parts of the Glass-Steagall Act. This push to pressure lenders to give sub prime loans by the Federal Government gave us a situation where people who couldn't afford to rent an apartment were given loans to buy a house. It wasn't a GOP thing...or a Democrat thing...they were BOTH complicit in changing the way banks do business.

Uh, 1977? Jimmy Carter. Community Reinvestment Act. I was wondering where you got that gem, and did a little quick research. And, can you believe it? All the bat shit crazy con web sites are saying what you have now said. Must be a coincidence, right. Or are you doing your normal. I understand, of course, why you had no link. For the same reason as always. Because you do not want anyone to know where you get your info. But one impartial source did take on the question:
Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 was passed by Congress to ensure that banks meet the credit needs of their local communities and to encourage investment in the immediate communities served by depository institutions. Banks are rated periodically on their efforts to achieve these goals.

The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) provides an interagencyCRA rating database on its website.

In addition, each bank has available for public review a file giving its CRA rating and additional information that it is required to prepare.

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.

The Fed, in collaboration with the other financial regulatory agencies, is currently considering what can be done to make CRA a more effective regulatory incentive and how CRA can be revised to address the new community needs that have emerged in the wake of the foreclosure crisis. As part of this regulatory initiative, the agencies held CRA hearings and invited written comments on how to improve CRA in June 2010. In December 2010, the agencies published amendments to the rule to encourage financial institutions to participate in activities aimed at revitalizing areas designated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for funds under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
As I thought there was no real link at all. Nice try, me boy. Normal for you.
FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?

And by the way, while you are blaming the recession on FANNY and FREDY, they are no more responsible than the private banks and financial institutions that offered bad loans. That is a typical CON post. There were plenty of private financial institutions that were as much and often more to blame.

 

[Synthaholic]

US Jobless claims fall to 4 decade low

I blame Obama!

 

[Oldstyle]

As with most things in Washington...it's a progression of legislation that creates the biggest problems. My point was that for you on the left to claim that Bush and the GOP are solely responsible for the economic melt down that occurred ignores things that Democratic Presidents like Carter and Clinton signed into law on THEIR watch! That isn't "desperation"...that's "reality"!

You would think that blaming Carter and a 40 year old law would be a clue to you of how ridiculous you look. But since all you care about is blaming Democrats, I guess you don't care about looking ridiculous.

If I'd only blamed Carter...as you and Rshermr ONLY blame Bush then yes I WOULD look ridiculous! I didn't do that though...did I? I showed how a progression of legislation passed by both Democrats and Republicans brought us to the point where a real estate bubble and crash did severe damage to US financial institutions!

What's "ridiculous" is to only blame one President who happened to be in office when the crash took place...a President who DID caution others that there was a problem looming!

Oh. Just happened to be. For eight years. And did nothing while the economy cratered. But it was not his fault???? Nice try, me boy, but you are supposed to be a history major. That does not give you a right to modify history.

Bush is the President who gave us TARP which is the one policy that actually DID prevent the economy from "cratering". You'd grasp that concept if you really DID know anything about economics or what took place during that economic meltdown! Bush is also the only President who warned that what we were doing with housing, Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac was dangerous for our financial institutions. You didn't hear that from Carter, Reagan, HW Bush or Clinton.

Proving you are a con tool, you make it sound like bush was trying to do something about his economic disaster. He was doing little. He saved a number of banks, made most richer than ever, but did little else. Nearly nothing. He was not part of the stimulus package, or any other economic effort to stop the disaster that was his. What saved us from a new Republican Depression was the Stimulus program, primarily And nothing else. There were exactly zero bills put forward by the republicans, but multiple efforts at stoping any bills put forward by the president.
There was, me boy, exactly one remaining effort to speed up the effects of the recession. And republicans voted against that effort every single time and with every single republican congressman voting to stop progress.

Bush did do something about the economic meltdown...he incurred the wrath of many conservatives by pushing TARP through.

 

[Faun]

And I never claimed anyone could single handedly stop anything...what I pointed out was that it was George W. Bush who warned Frank that the way we were conducting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had the potential to be dangerous for our economy and it was Frank who denied that was the case. So who was right?

That was in 2003, and at that time Frank was correct.
After that Bush appointed HIS man to head Fannie and Freddie in 2004 and the lending INCREASED!!!! Bush owns the housing crash.

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership is at an all time high!" ~ George W. Bush, 2004 RNC acceptance speech

The things that were going on at Fannie and Freddie were what Bush was referring to...not the BIPARTISAN effort to get more Americans into home ownership!

And the "things that were going on at Fannie and Freddie," along with Fed policies, along with insufficient oversight of "Fannie and Freddie" ... caused the housing markets to collapse. Which in turn, took out the credit markets. Which in turn, cratered the entire economy.

Do you see now why everyone laughs at you for blaming Democrats when you yourself just unwittingly blamed Republicans?

The EXCESSIVE oversight by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd was as you know, responsible for the mortgage/housing/financial collapse. At the time too, Barney Franks lover was on the board of directors of Fannie Mae. He got paid bonuses the more loans Fannie Mae purchased. It was also, at this time that Barney and Chris INCREASED the percentage of subprime loans they were FORCED TO BUY.

So you're not gonna even try to answer my question, huh?

Your idiocy aside, Barney Frank could not, and did not, block a single GSE reform bill.

Republican leadership, on the other hand, wouldn't let a single GSE reform bill get past his desk.

 

[Oldstyle]

When did I ever claim that the GOP attempted to pass legislation to address Bush's concerns? Republicans in Congress did as little as the Democrats did!

That doesn't change the fact that the fiscal meltdown can be traced to several key pieces of legislation...one of which was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 which Jimmy Carter signed into being. Bill Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act into being which did away with parts of the Glass-Steagall Act. This push to pressure lenders to give sub prime loans by the Federal Government gave us a situation where people who couldn't afford to rent an apartment were given loans to buy a house. It wasn't a GOP thing...or a Democrat thing...they were BOTH complicit in changing the way banks do business.

Uh, 1977? Jimmy Carter. Community Reinvestment Act. I was wondering where you got that gem, and did a little quick research. And, can you believe it? All the bat shit crazy con web sites are saying what you have now said. Must be a coincidence, right. Or are you doing your normal. I understand, of course, why you had no link. For the same reason as always. Because you do not want anyone to know where you get your info. But one impartial source did take on the question:
Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 was passed by Congress to ensure that banks meet the credit needs of their local communities and to encourage investment in the immediate communities served by depository institutions. Banks are rated periodically on their efforts to achieve these goals.

The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) provides an interagencyCRA rating database on its website.

In addition, each bank has available for public review a file giving its CRA rating and additional information that it is required to prepare.

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.

The Fed, in collaboration with the other financial regulatory agencies, is currently considering what can be done to make CRA a more effective regulatory incentive and how CRA can be revised to address the new community needs that have emerged in the wake of the foreclosure crisis. As part of this regulatory initiative, the agencies held CRA hearings and invited written comments on how to improve CRA in June 2010. In December 2010, the agencies published amendments to the rule to encourage financial institutions to participate in activities aimed at revitalizing areas designated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for funds under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
As I thought there was no real link at all. Nice try, me boy. Normal for you.
FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?

And by the way, while you are blaming the recession on FANNY and FREDY, they are no more responsible than the private banks and financial institutions that offered bad loans. That is a typical CON post. There were plenty of private financial institutions that were as much and often more to blame.

Unlike you, Rshermr...I actually know what the Community Reinvestment Act consisted of and I'm able to state that off of the top of my head. You see...I actually went to college, took classes like macro and micro economics as well as history and political science. I read several papers on a daily basis so I'm cognizant of what's going on in the world I live in. There has been an ongoing debate over the years about the dangers of government inserting itself into markets like housing and forcing lenders to make loans that quite frankly wouldn't have even been considered forty years ago.

As a conservative I don't want to see financial institutions bailed out by the taxpayers...but I also don't want the government forcing lenders to make loans to satisfy political correctness rather than basing whether that loan should be given strictly on proper banking practices.

 

[Faun]

It didn't matter if all the Republicans voted against Obama's original stimulus because he had the Democratic votes to push it through regardless...just as he did with ObamaCare!

The second stimulus that Barry asked for...he couldn't even sell to his fellow Democrats! That's how bad the first stimulus was at creating jobs.

What a fucking rightard you are. You have no shame at all, do ya?

It's a flat out lie to state Republicans could not have blocked passage of the ARRA just as it's a lie to pretend they were helpless to stop it just like they couldn't stop ObamaCare, which was passed with a filibuster-proof Senate.

To say Republicans COULD have stopped Obamacare is just plain foolish.

As you well know, Lame Duck President used bribery, payoffs and most likely blackmail along with rules changes to shove Obamacare up our...throats.

For the life of me, I'll never understand what the fuck is wrong with you rightards. I never said Republicans could have stopped Obamacare. Where do you come up with this shit? How does your brain translate what I wrote into what you wrote?

So you admit that the GOP couldn't stop ObamaCare...but you claim that they COULD stop the Obama Stimulus? Come on, Faun...just admit that stimulus was basically written behind closed doors by Harry and Nancy...and that the reason it was such a flop was that it turned into a liberal "pork fest" that rewarded liberal donors, liberal causes and the public sector employees that support Democrats. If you were an American Private Sector worker either laid off because of the recession or worried that you might be laid off...there was little in the Obama Stimulus that was going to help you.

While I never denied they couldn't block ObamaCare, you're fucking deranged to think Republicans couldn't block the ARRA just as they couldn't block the ACA.

 

[Markle]

When did I ever claim that the GOP attempted to pass legislation to address Bush's concerns? Republicans in Congress did as little as the Democrats did!

That doesn't change the fact that the fiscal meltdown can be traced to several key pieces of legislation...one of which was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 which Jimmy Carter signed into being. Bill Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act into being which did away with parts of the Glass-Steagall Act. This push to pressure lenders to give sub prime loans by the Federal Government gave us a situation where people who couldn't afford to rent an apartment were given loans to buy a house. It wasn't a GOP thing...or a Democrat thing...they were BOTH complicit in changing the way banks do business.

Uh, 1977? Jimmy Carter. Community Reinvestment Act. I was wondering where you got that gem, and did a little quick research. And, can you believe it? All the bat shit crazy con web sites are saying what you have now said. Must be a coincidence, right. Or are you doing your normal. I understand, of course, why you had no link. For the same reason as always. Because you do not want anyone to know where you get your info. But one impartial source did take on the question:
Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 was passed by Congress to ensure that banks meet the credit needs of their local communities and to encourage investment in the immediate communities served by depository institutions. Banks are rated periodically on their efforts to achieve these goals.

The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) provides an interagencyCRA rating database on its website.

In addition, each bank has available for public review a file giving its CRA rating and additional information that it is required to prepare.

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.

The Fed, in collaboration with the other financial regulatory agencies, is currently considering what can be done to make CRA a more effective regulatory incentive and how CRA can be revised to address the new community needs that have emerged in the wake of the foreclosure crisis. As part of this regulatory initiative, the agencies held CRA hearings and invited written comments on how to improve CRA in June 2010. In December 2010, the agencies published amendments to the rule to encourage financial institutions to participate in activities aimed at revitalizing areas designated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for funds under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
As I thought there was no real link at all. Nice try, me boy. Normal for you.
FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?

And by the way, while you are blaming the recession on FANNY and FREDY, they are no more responsible than the private banks and financial institutions that offered bad loans. That is a typical CON post. There were plenty of private financial institutions that were as much and often more to blame.

You certainly have more word salad than anyone on this forum. Amusing!

While the CRA is not directly responsible for the mortgage/housing/financial collapse, they did greatly influence that downfall.

The reduced loan standards for low-income people had to be made available to everyone. One example would be the creation of one of the dumber "innovations". That would be the "no-doc" loans. The intent was to make it easier for people working for tips, or paid cash could qualify by simply stating their income. The result was that anyone could make a loan application for any house and simply tell the loan officer how much they made. Presto, loan approved. Fannie and Freddie were pushing banks to make more subprime loans and they were happy to comply. We had a Countrywide loan office here in Tallahassee. I would never use them although I usually worked with sellers. Well known was the fact that if a customer couldn't get approved anywhere else, Countrywide would get them a loan.

Granted, I was well known to my bank, but I got one myself when I had the opportunity to buy and flip a house. I went into the bank, talked to the branch manager, told her how much I wanted and SunTrust called me on the way back to my office to tell me the loan was approved.

 

[Faun]

It didn't matter if all the Republicans voted against Obama's original stimulus because he had the Democratic votes to push it through regardless...just as he did with ObamaCare!

The second stimulus that Barry asked for...he couldn't even sell to his fellow Democrats! That's how bad the first stimulus was at creating jobs.

What a fucking rightard you are. You have no shame at all, do ya?

It's a flat out lie to state Republicans could not have blocked passage of the ARRA just as it's a lie to pretend they were helpless to stop it just like they couldn't stop ObamaCare, which was passed with a filibuster-proof Senate.

To say Republicans COULD have stopped Obamacare is just plain foolish.

As you well know, Lame Duck President used bribery, payoffs and most likely blackmail along with rules changes to shove Obamacare up our...throats.

For the life of me, I'll never understand what the fuck is wrong with you rightards. I never said Republicans could have stopped Obamacare. Where do you come up with this shit? How does your brain translate what I wrote into what you wrote?

Are these not your words?

"It's a flat out lie to state Republicans could not have blocked passage of the ARRA just as it's a lie to pretend they were helpless to stop it just like they couldn't stop ObamaCare, which was passed with a filibuster-proof Senate."

Yes, they are.

Those would be the words I put together to say Republicans could not block ObamaCare because Democrats had a filibuster-proof Senate when it passed.

Which is exactly the reason you look like a complete fucking retard by responding with... your words...

"To say Republicans COULD have stopped Obamacare is just plain foolish."​

... when I said no such thing. I said Republicans, "couldn't" stop it.

But that's ok. I don't actually expect lucid replies from conservatives.

 

[Oldstyle]

That was in 2003, and at that time Frank was correct.
After that Bush appointed HIS man to head Fannie and Freddie in 2004 and the lending INCREASED!!!! Bush owns the housing crash.

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership is at an all time high!" ~ George W. Bush, 2004 RNC acceptance speech

The things that were going on at Fannie and Freddie were what Bush was referring to...not the BIPARTISAN effort to get more Americans into home ownership!

And the "things that were going on at Fannie and Freddie," along with Fed policies, along with insufficient oversight of "Fannie and Freddie" ... caused the housing markets to collapse. Which in turn, took out the credit markets. Which in turn, cratered the entire economy.

Do you see now why everyone laughs at you for blaming Democrats when you yourself just unwittingly blamed Republicans?

The EXCESSIVE oversight by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd was as you know, responsible for the mortgage/housing/financial collapse. At the time too, Barney Franks lover was on the board of directors of Fannie Mae. He got paid bonuses the more loans Fannie Mae purchased. It was also, at this time that Barney and Chris INCREASED the percentage of subprime loans they were FORCED TO BUY.

So you're not gonna even try to answer my question, huh?

Your idiocy aside, Barney Frank could not, and did not, block a single GSE reform bill.

Republican leadership, on the other hand, wouldn't let a single GSE reform bill get past his desk.

 

[Oldstyle]

Don't you love it when a liberal like Slick Willie doesn't spout the "party line" and tells the truth!

 

[Rshermr]

When did I ever claim that the GOP attempted to pass legislation to address Bush's concerns? Republicans in Congress did as little as the Democrats did!

That doesn't change the fact that the fiscal meltdown can be traced to several key pieces of legislation...one of which was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 which Jimmy Carter signed into being. Bill Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act into being which did away with parts of the Glass-Steagall Act. This push to pressure lenders to give sub prime loans by the Federal Government gave us a situation where people who couldn't afford to rent an apartment were given loans to buy a house. It wasn't a GOP thing...or a Democrat thing...they were BOTH complicit in changing the way banks do business.

Uh, 1977? Jimmy Carter. Community Reinvestment Act. I was wondering where you got that gem, and did a little quick research. And, can you believe it? All the bat shit crazy con web sites are saying what you have now said. Must be a coincidence, right. Or are you doing your normal. I understand, of course, why you had no link. For the same reason as always. Because you do not want anyone to know where you get your info. But one impartial source did take on the question:
Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 was passed by Congress to ensure that banks meet the credit needs of their local communities and to encourage investment in the immediate communities served by depository institutions. Banks are rated periodically on their efforts to achieve these goals.

The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) provides an interagencyCRA rating database on its website.

In addition, each bank has available for public review a file giving its CRA rating and additional information that it is required to prepare.

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.

The Fed, in collaboration with the other financial regulatory agencies, is currently considering what can be done to make CRA a more effective regulatory incentive and how CRA can be revised to address the new community needs that have emerged in the wake of the foreclosure crisis. As part of this regulatory initiative, the agencies held CRA hearings and invited written comments on how to improve CRA in June 2010. In December 2010, the agencies published amendments to the rule to encourage financial institutions to participate in activities aimed at revitalizing areas designated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for funds under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
As I thought there was no real link at all. Nice try, me boy. Normal for you.
FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?

And by the way, while you are blaming the recession on FANNY and FREDY, they are no more responsible than the private banks and financial institutions that offered bad loans. That is a typical CON post. There were plenty of private financial institutions that were as much and often more to blame.

You certainly have more word salad than anyone on this forum. Amusing!

While the CRA is not directly responsible for the mortgage/housing/financial collapse, they did greatly influence that downfall.

The reduced loan standards for low-income people had to be made available to everyone. One example would be the creation of one of the dumber "innovations". That would be the "no-doc" loans. The intent was to make it easier for people working for tips, or paid cash could qualify by simply stating their income. The result was that anyone could make a loan application for any house and simply tell the loan officer how much they made. Presto, loan approved. Fannie and Freddie were pushing banks to make more subprime loans and they were happy to comply. We had a Countrywide loan office here in Tallahassee. I would never use them although I usually worked with sellers. Well known was the fact that if a customer couldn't get approved anywhere else, Countrywide would get them a loan.

Granted, I was well known to my bank, but I got one myself when I had the opportunity to buy and flip a house. I went into the bank, talked to the branch manager, told her how much I wanted and SunTrust called me on the way back to my office to tell me the loan was approved.

Do you have an IMPARTIAL source that will give your statement that CRA influenced the mortgage collapse?? I can find none. Just nut case web sites trying to make that case, nothing else. What impartial sources I have seen say that CRA was NOT influential.

 

[Rshermr]

You would think that blaming Carter and a 40 year old law would be a clue to you of how ridiculous you look. But since all you care about is blaming Democrats, I guess you don't care about looking ridiculous.

If I'd only blamed Carter...as you and Rshermr ONLY blame Bush then yes I WOULD look ridiculous! I didn't do that though...did I? I showed how a progression of legislation passed by both Democrats and Republicans brought us to the point where a real estate bubble and crash did severe damage to US financial institutions!

What's "ridiculous" is to only blame one President who happened to be in office when the crash took place...a President who DID caution others that there was a problem looming!

Oh. Just happened to be. For eight years. And did nothing while the economy cratered. But it was not his fault???? Nice try, me boy, but you are supposed to be a history major. That does not give you a right to modify history.

Bush is the President who gave us TARP which is the one policy that actually DID prevent the economy from "cratering". You'd grasp that concept if you really DID know anything about economics or what took place during that economic meltdown! Bush is also the only President who warned that what we were doing with housing, Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac was dangerous for our financial institutions. You didn't hear that from Carter, Reagan, HW Bush or Clinton.

Proving you are a con tool, you make it sound like bush was trying to do something about his economic disaster. He was doing little. He saved a number of banks, made most richer than ever, but did little else. Nearly nothing. He was not part of the stimulus package, or any other economic effort to stop the disaster that was his. What saved us from a new Republican Depression was the Stimulus program, primarily And nothing else. There were exactly zero bills put forward by the republicans, but multiple efforts at stoping any bills put forward by the president.
There was, me boy, exactly one remaining effort to speed up the effects of the recession. And republicans voted against that effort every single time and with every single republican congressman voting to stop progress.

Bush did do something about the economic meltdown...he incurred the wrath of many conservatives by pushing TARP through.

Yes he did. And he did nothing the for mainstreet. And the american public by being unable to stop the worst recession since the great Republican Depression of 1929. So, yup, that is it. He did something AFTER the cow was out of the barn. Nice. So, are you just trying to say his heart was in the right place??

 

[Rshermr]

Don't you love it when a liberal like Slick Willie doesn't spout the "party line" and tells the truth!

It would have been interesting if you did not pick a clip out of a bunch that were all pro conservative nonsense. You see, me boy, it is good if you see the full clip, not one ended before you get the full statement.
See yet why no one believes you. I provide impartial sources, you provide a source from a group of clips from an obvious anti democrat agenda. Nice.