Where McDonald's wages start near $15...
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#734 Oct 4, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
You fail to understand that there are good regulations and bad regulations. When it comes to our government they keep making bad regulations that interfere in the market.
The 'bad' regulations were the bills eliminating Glass-Steagall, and allowing derivatives to be less regulated.

Even Alan Greenspan was humbled by the meltdown, and recognized that wallstreeters sunk our economy because of little government oversight. He admitted that the meltdown shook his libertarian belief that the 'free market' will always work fine. That Fed Chief was a member of libertarian Ayn Rand's inner circle.
Sam Lowree wrote:
< The Canadian banking system wasn't hit by the recession, at least not to the extent that we were, and some say that their regulations prevented the financial bubble hitting their economy.
That's correct.
Sam Lowree wrote:
< The Canadian government is also not in the business of trying to tell banks to lend to those who cannot afford it.
That's unbelievably wrong, and directly contradicts your previous sentence.

As I showed in other posts, the Canadian banks are far more regulated than ours-- in fact, that's WHY they weren't hurt by the meltdown like we were.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#735 Oct 4, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
I already did. I gave you the links to the congressional records citing that legislation. I gave you sworn testimony from the head of HUD. You just read Barney Frank's own admission to government involvement. Yet you will not believe reality. You are living in your own self deluded world.
Barney Frank DID NOT say that the government's regulations forced Wall Street to make bad loans.

You can have your opinions but you can't change the facts.

SHOW US where the government pushed mortgage banks and Wall Street firms to make and pool subprime loans. These companies were under NO CRA mandate. Fannie and Freddie made prime loans, and had little or nothing to do with the meltdown.

These are the FACTS. But these facts threaten your ideology that the government's always the culprit. These same facts are what caused Alan Greenspan, a randian libertarian, to re-think his totally 'free market' beliefs.

But you can't re-think anything. Your ideology prevents it.
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#736 Oct 4, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
I totally agree with you, however...
You made a tiny mistake and wrote "Lefties" where you should have written RIGHT WING NUTS..
GRANDPA...

As you know, it's called PROJECTION.
Local

Clearlake, CA

#737 Oct 4, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Barney Frank DID NOT say that the government's regulations forced Wall Street to make bad loans.
You can have your opinions but you can't change the facts.
SHOW US where the government pushed mortgage banks and Wall Street firms to make and pool subprime loans. These companies were under NO CRA mandate. Fannie and Freddie made prime loans, and had little or nothing to do with the meltdown.
These are the FACTS. But these facts threaten your ideology that the government's always the culprit. These same facts are what caused Alan Greenspan, a randian libertarian, to re-think his totally 'free market' beliefs.
But you can't re-think anything. Your ideology prevents it.
Riiiiiight lil teepee.
The Glass Steagall ACT worked fine without a major banking calamity for 70 years....until Bill Clinton and the dems put the banking industry on steroids with the Finance Modernization Act/CRA amendments.

It is just a coincidence that everything went to hell 8 years later.
Lmao......are you really that dopey?

You are a moron, but even a moron can see what happened.
Is having Hillary and Bill back in the whitehouse that important to you?
ANY moderate democrat can beat any republican contender for that job right now......and into the foreseeable future....unless....the debt/budget problems crash the economy....and then its anyones guess.
Rand Paul perhaps.
ROTFLMAO
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#738 Oct 4, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
Riiiiiight lil teepee.
The Glass Steagall ACT worked fine without a major banking calamity for 70 years....until Bill Clinton and the dems put the banking industry on steroids with the Finance Modernization Act/CRA amendments.

Rand Paul perhaps.
ROTFLMAO
Hey, butthead.... do you know that Rand Paul is a de-regulatory libertarian? He'd veto a new Glass-Steagall bill in a heartbeat. And then he'd get rid of any other regulation he could find. He'd throw our country off the cliff so quickly you'd wonder what hit you.

Try to think for yourself some time. Think things through, observe the ramifications of each idea. Try for some logical consistency in your belief system.

Nah, just do what you can-- keep on being a Tbagger dittohead.
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#739 Oct 4, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
"in 2010, the new HUD secretary, Shawn Donovan, told the House Financial Services Committee:“Seeing their market share decline [between 2004 and 2006] as a result of a change of demand, the GSEs made the decision to widen their focus from safer prime loans and begin chasing the non-prime market, loosening longstanding underwriting and risk management standards along the way.”
How in the flock did anything that anyone did in 2010 have anything to do with the melt -down that started in 2007 and climaxed in 2009?

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#740 Oct 4, 2013
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
How in the flock did anything that anyone did in 2010 have anything to do with the melt -down that started in 2007 and climaxed in 2009?
Obviously you have difficulty reading.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#741 Oct 4, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>

That's unbelievably wrong, and directly contradicts your previous sentence.
As I showed in other posts, the Canadian banks are far more regulated than ours-- in fact, that's WHY they weren't hurt by the meltdown like we were.
Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
How many regulations are there governing Canadian banks as opposed to U.S. banks? You state that Canadian banks are regulated much more than U.S. banks so you must have a number.

You seem to have trouble understanding the fact that there are good regulations and bad regulations. The Canadian banks were not told to make bad risk loans as the U.S. lenders were. You know, my previous post that you ignored. There is no Fannie, Freddie or HUD in Canada. If there were no Fannie, Freddie or HUD the financial crisis would not have happened.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#742 Oct 5, 2013
^
^
Baloney!

Fannie and Freddie were more like victims rather than the cause of the US financial crisis.

"Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent, according to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, a specialty publication. Even so, by 2007 only 17 percent of their total portfolio was either either subprime or Alt-A loans. Due to regulations, their percentage of these loans are actually better than many banks."

http://useconomy.about.com/od/criticalssues/a...

"If the conservative view was correct, one would expect to see mortgages originated for Fannie and Freddie securitization, as well as those originated for purposes of CRA, to default at higher rates, since these were the loans directly subject to affordable housing policies. In fact, we see quite the opposite, as these loans have performed exponentially better than those originated for private securitization, which the FCIC Republicans ignore."

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/econom...

"The myth that Fannie and Freddie are responsible for the Great Recession is useful to conservatives because it combines several of their shibboleths like the evils of Big Government and the idea that "compassion" causes more harm than good. Liberal compassion is inimical to their idea that only the pursuit of self-interest serves the greater good. Thus, Big Government targets are a giant pinata that conservatives can not resist flailing at. However, as usual the facts have a liberal bias. "As the FCIC staff reports demonstrate fairly conclusively, it was the shadow banking system's unregulated private securitization of mortgages that caused the financial crisis, not affordable housing policies."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marvin-meadors/...
Local

Clearlake, CA

#743 Oct 5, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, butthead.... do you know that Rand Paul is a de-regulatory libertarian? He'd veto a new Glass-Steagall bill in a heartbeat. And then he'd get rid of any other regulation he could find. He'd throw our country off the cliff so quickly you'd wonder what hit you.
Try to think for yourself some time. Think things through, observe the ramifications of each idea. Try for some logical consistency in your belief system.
Nah, just do what you can-- keep on being a Tbagger dittohead.
Logical consistency? lmao

Sorry, this is the obama era........there is not logical consistency in U.S. foreign policy, federal debt, nobamacare, or U.S. societal norms.

How's it workin for us?

How's it workin for ya?
Local

Clearlake, CA

#744 Oct 5, 2013
Thanks to Bill Clinton, barney Frank, and the other liberal arsewipes, fannie/freddie(U.S. Taxpayers) ended up holding the bag at the end of the 8 year long government mandated real estate ponzi scheme(Finance modernization Act) signed into law by non other than pres Bill Clinton.

Only government could have screwed up the works that badly!!!!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#745 Oct 5, 2013
>
>
Thanks to Bush the W and his cronies the US taxpayers experienced the worst attack on the mainland, got stuck paying trillions for two phony wars and they also suffered from THE WORST RECESSION SINCE THE GREAT DEPRESSION because Bush the W looked away while the rich banking rats played....
TWP

Wichita Falls, TX

#746 Oct 5, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
>
the rich...played....!!!
Hey "GRANDPA NICOLAI"...

Aren't you supposed to be worth over $100 Million Dollars...?

And didn't you say that you make $250,000.000 "on any day"...?

Wow...!

Hey "GRANDPA NICOLAI"...

Can you say "HYPOCRITE"...?!!!

ROTFLMAO...!!!

http://www.merrystandish.com/dolanloses.html

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#747 Oct 5, 2013
Milton Freidman and Walter Williams discussing minimum wages.
#t=238
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#748 Oct 5, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
Milton Freidman and Walter Williams discussing minimum wages.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =x-BGi4NIFwwXX#t=238
>
>
Milton Friedman, wasn't he the conservative economist who finally admitted that government intervention was necessary to prevent economic depressions...???

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/opinion/kru...
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#749 Oct 6, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Milton Friedman, wasn't he the conservative economist who finally admitted that government intervention was necessary to prevent economic depressions...???
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/opinion/kru...
GRANDPA,

Yes, in my research I found the same facts. Friedman, if he were still alive, would be promoting stimulus spending.

But, hey, we're talking to people who idolize St. Reagan, when the fact is Reagan would be banished from the republican party if he was alive today.
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#750 Oct 6, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
Logical consistency? lmao
Sorry, this is the obama era........there is not logical consistency in U.S. foreign policy, federal debt, nobamacare, or U.S. societal norms.
How's it workin for us?
How's it workin for ya?
You didn't reply to my points about Rand Paul.

You didn't reply to my points about Rand Paul.
Tea Party Solution

Chico, CA

#751 Oct 6, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
.
You seem to have trouble understanding the fact that there are good regulations and bad regulations.
No, I have said often that we need GOOD and ENFORCED regulations. The US financial meltdown was caused by the repeal of good regulations which had kept us out of catastrophe for many years.

Sam Lowree wrote:
<The Canadian banks were not told to make bad risk loans as the U.S. lenders were. You know, my previous post that you ignored. There is no Fannie, Freddie or HUD in Canada. If there were no Fannie, Freddie or HUD the financial crisis would not have happened.
GRANDPA, THE RIGHT IS WRONG, and myself have asked you forever-- SHOW US where the government mandated the PRIVATE LENDERS to make subprime loans.

The meltdown was named the subprime meltdown for a reason.

And here's how Canadians avoided this catastrophe:

" In the past several decades, while the shadow banking system mushroomed in the US reflecting deregulation and financial innovation, in Canada the chartered banks were permitted to absorb both mortgage banks and investment dealers. These universal banks were in turn tightly regulated by one regulator, OFSCI, which greatly constrained their ability to take on the risk of CDOs and SIVs compared to their US counterparts. As a result, the Canadian financial system largely avoided the financial crisis of 2007-2008."

http://www.economist.com/economics/by-invitat...

To repeat, the banks were tightly regulated by the OFSCI, "which greatly constrained their ability to take on the risk of CDOs and SIVs compared to their US counterparts."

The Canadian system has sound, mature, and strong regulations.
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#752 Oct 6, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously you have difficulty reading.
Please explain how someone doing something in 2010 caused the financial bubble to burst in 2007 -2009.
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#753 Oct 6, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I have said often that we need GOOD and ENFORCED regulations. The US financial meltdown was caused by the repeal of good regulations which had kept us out of catastrophe for many years.
<quoted text>
GRANDPA, THE RIGHT IS WRONG, and myself have asked you forever-- SHOW US where the government mandated the PRIVATE LENDERS to make subprime loans.
The meltdown was named the subprime meltdown for a reason.
And here's how Canadians avoided this catastrophe:
" In the past several decades, while the shadow banking system mushroomed in the US reflecting deregulation and financial innovation, in Canada the chartered banks were permitted to absorb both mortgage banks and investment dealers. These universal banks were in turn tightly regulated by one regulator, OFSCI, which greatly constrained their ability to take on the risk of CDOs and SIVs compared to their US counterparts. As a result, the Canadian financial system largely avoided the financial crisis of 2007-2008."
http://www.economist.com/economics/by-invitat...
To repeat, the banks were tightly regulated by the OFSCI, "which greatly constrained their ability to take on the risk of CDOs and SIVs compared to their US counterparts."
The Canadian system has sound, mature, and strong regulations.
It's hopeless! sam can't/won't listen to facts!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richvale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
DONALD the TRUMP unleashed 'LATINO SPRING' 2 hr News 2
Unemployment FALLS TO LOWEST LEVEL in 7 years. 9 hr GRANDPA NICOLAI 8
Why give a damn about MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING? 9 hr GRANDPA NICOLAI 1
why is grumpy so angry? 10 hr Here Is One 3
CONSERVATIVE PUNK arrested for threatening OBAMA 13 hr GRANDPA NICOLAI 1
natural news agrees that co2 cools Thu Here Is One 3
U.S. Majority proud of Confederate flag Thu Here Is One 7
More from around the web

Richvale People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Richvale Mortgages