AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Part 1

What does slobbering Barney Frank have to say about all of this? Part 2

Part 3

0 Replies

@parados,

That you haven't understood my argument from jump...is a problem of yours not mine. What you have projected... is also your problem not mine.

Try to catch up.

2 Replies

@Brand WTF,

Brand WTF wrote:

That you haven't understood my argument from jump...is a problem of yours not mine. What you have projected... is also your problem not mine.

Try to catch up.

To be fair to Parados, your argument hasn't been all that coherent.

Perhaps you could lay it out again?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Perhaps you could lay it out again?

Please, no - I can't handle another layer of total stupidity.......

0 Replies

The GOP and tea party in congress promises to cut spending, but the biggest areas of spending are a) social security, b) health and human services, c) department of defense, and d) interest payments on debt.

Where are they going to cut, and by how much?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Where are they going to cut, and by how much?

After another $700 billion (that's billion) handout to the top 1% of the most wealthiest, who cares - they are all a sham anyways!

1 Reply

@BillW,

They have people like okie who thinks and believes the same way as those on FOX News; cut taxes, and increase our national debt.

Makes a whole lot of sense to them, but I'm wondering what ever happened to their brains? Haven't they heard of Greece, Ireland, Spain, and Italy? The interest payment on the US debt is one of the biggest expenses for our government; that means that bond interest rates are too low to be sustained in the open market place.

They want to rush our country into bankruptcy.

3 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

I saw Cornyn on TV the other day saying 'tax cuts don't add to the debt.' Mind-boggling.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Brand WTF,

Brand WTF wrote:

CRA loans were just like any other loans, there wasn't a ******* gov't employee sitting in every bank office reviewing every loan...to say there was a way to separate all of them out is ******* naive.

So... that means banks didn't have to worry about the government inspecting their loans.

Brand WTF wrote:

Here's another example of CRA requirements pushing banks into corners:

http://www.businessinsider.com/three-ways-the-cra-pushed-countrywide-to-lower-lending-standards-2009-6

what you linked to contains this..

Quote:

Banks that were regulated by the CRA often found it difficult to meet their obligations under the CRA directly. Long standing lending practices by local loan officers were a big problem. But as banks expanded their deposit bases and other businesses, they often found that they were at risk of regulators discovering they had fallen behind in making CRA loans.

That means banks were worried about the government looking at their paper work.

Which of these 2 arguments did you not mean to make?

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

parados wrote:

http://www.businessinsider.com/three-ways-the-cra-pushed-countrywide-to-lower-lending-standards-2009-6

what you linked to contains this..

Quote:
Banks that were regulated by the CRA often found it difficult to meet their obligations under the CRA directly. Long standing lending practices by local loan officers were a big problem. But as banks expanded their deposit bases and other businesses, they often found that they were at risk of regulators discovering they had fallen behind in making CRA loans.

That means banks were worried about the government looking at their paper work.

What's worse in that piece is the paragraph following it:

Quote:

One way of addressing this problem was buying the loans in the secondary market. Mortgage companies like Countrywide began to serve this entirely artificial demand for CRA loans. Countrywide marketed its loans directly to banks as a way for them to meet CRA obligations. "The result of these efforts is an enormous pipeline of mortgages to low- and moderate-income buyers. With this pipeline, Countrywide Securities Corporation (CSC) can potentially help you meet your Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) goals by offering both whole loan and mortgage-backed securities that are eligible for CRA credit,” a Countrywide advertisement on its website read.

It wasn't an 'artificial' demand. The fact is that banks are still struggling with what they call 'long-standing lending practices' in their local branches, ie, latent racial bias. During the years 2000-2007 there was no shortage of people from all income levels looking for houses, but banks still weren't lending to them. That's a real demand.

Not only that, but the only real evidence that this was related to the problem at all, presented in this piece, is a blurb from.. Countrywide's website. No analysis of how deep the problem was or what percentage of the loans Countrywide gave out fell under the CRA. Just a bland assertion that this was a huge problem and lead to the crisis.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

They have people like okie who thinks and believes the same way as those on FOX News; cut taxes, and increase our national debt.

No, you completely misrepresent what I believe and say. Essentially you end up lying. What I think and believe is to cut spending first. It is no different than what a responsible family would do to balance their budget. Yet you continue to twist what I believe and say, because you repeat the garbage coming out of the DNC.

I repeat, it is not primarily a tax revenue problem, it is primarily a government spending problem.

1 Reply

@okie,

Of coarse we're the ones who misrepresent what you say - even when evidence is shown by your own words so often.

okie wrote:

Quote:

I repeat, it is not primarily a tax revenue problem, it is primarily a government spending problem.

Wrong again, pothead. As the economy tanked - during GW Bush's tenure - tax revenues dropped as well as the world economy while he cut taxes. All while - as a matter of fact - congress failed to tax those who can afford to pay more taxes - at a time when their incomes increased at the fastest rate, and while our country was involved in two wars, extension of unemployment for those who have lost jobs (need to shelter and feed our own citizens), and other necessary spending by government.

If it's "primarily a government spending problem," exactly where are they overspending? Please be concise, and tell us where they should cut spending?

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Not only that, but the only real evidence that this was related to the problem at all, presented in this piece, is a blurb from.. Countrywide's website. No analysis of how deep the problem was or what percentage of the loans Countrywide gave out fell under the CRA

Except Countrywide wasn't subject to CRA and the only way the banks would benefit from the Countrywide loans was to buy them for their books which means that Fannie/Freddie couldn't be responsible for them in any way. F/F didn't write the loans and didn't buy them under that scenario.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

They want to rush our country into bankruptcy.

I have believed for a few years now (more than eight, at least) that this is the Repubs plan. This will bring down America and since they reason they have business and the ultra rich in their back pockets they will then be able to create a new government, controled by them that would be a totalitarian fascist dictatorship. And, life goes on..........................

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

I saw Cornyn on TV the other day saying 'tax cuts don't add to the debt.' Mind-boggling.

Reagan use to claim that Foreign Exchange deficits and National Debt are just paper only and shouldn't be considered in decision making. Needless to say, he is by far the leaading builder of the US debt with GWB in 2nd place and no one else any where in sight. This is the chief proof that supply side economics is a bust - just doesn't work!

1 Reply

@BillW,

And here we have Obama extending tax cuts for the rich for two more years, because he lied to the American people - yet again.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

Quote:

Why are critical thinking and the ability to apply common sense to issues not available to those on the left?

The real question is why your vacuity hasn't caused your head to implode?

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Actually, I find most of georgeob's arguments and all those made by H2Oman and ican to be of the no-you're-ugly variety. At least okie is original in that respect: he generally sits and kisses himself in the mirror, praising his common sense and his self-valued but non-existent superiority.

0 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

secondly, there is nothing wrong with the guy's looks.

Have the hots for him?

0 Replies

@BillW,

I took your Banner spelling to be satirical.

0 Replies

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know