Members GoldenDogs Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 I have no doubt many, many people were preyed upon by real estate brokers, agents, and mortgage lenders. It was all to keep the party going. I do expect a level of personal responsibility, though, from grown people managing their financial affairs. Sounds like you guys did pretty well for yourself and that's cool! I've always looked at ARM's suspiciously and won't do it... When I bought my place, I insisted on a fixed rate. Next time I buy, I'll go fixed... We agree on many, many things Greg! We just don't talk about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Hmmmmm. Very interesting, Golden. Is this the only change they made since assuming power in 2001? And wasn't the Congress in Republican control when Clinton and his administration made changes to allow easier financing rules? As you know, the majority of the loans that are now failing happened during the housing boom from 2002 - 2005. Since this change was made in 2003, why did these loans get approved? What happened to the oversight from this agency? There's no denying that it's a compelling article and an argument for what you believe is all Clinton's fault. But there are still answered questions.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Again, IA. I wanted everyone to see this article on race relations - a topic that has been discussed on this thread the last few days. It's an interesting read. Race relations in America Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GoldenDogs Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Well, I can't answer all of your questions, Greg. Obviously what the Bush Administration proposed here never came to be... It was up to lawmakers to craft a bill and they never did. I'm with you in blaming both parties for their failure to make that happen. I do know (and I think information on this was previously posted in this thread) that John McCain introduced a similar bit of legislation in 2005 -- and that is what McCain and Palin have been promoting on the stump. The biggest challenge during that time, though, was convincing Democrats that there was a problem. As you could see in the article, the two Dems quoted there refused to acknowledge the very existence of a problem... that being the case, I can see that it would be impossible to even get a bill out of committee. They don't advance things they perceive to be non-issues. Sadly, they employed the ever-popular "class warfare" strategy -- making it sound as if someone were trying to deny housing to the poor... politics as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Yes, I did see that in the article and it does give me pause. It was certainly eye-opening. Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members George008 Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 I can't be happy that Palin drew a crowd? Sorry.. It means (to me) that many many people are interested in the Republican stance on issues... How do you feel McCain's reporting is misleading? I don't believe the Democrats "wanted" the market to crash...I don't believe I said anything to that effect. That's like saying they hope America fails in Iraq because they are against the war. That was my point..the Dems will use this situation to excuse their agenda of big government and regulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members George008 Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Nah. I was talking about all of the concerts before his speech at Mile High Stadium before his speech..Sheryl Crow...Kanye West..etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Be as happy as you want to be. It's not for me to tell you not to be happy. All I'm saying is that the Repub's argument against Obama being a "rock star" is apparently out the window. That accusation has happened in the past as well. Perhaps not from mainstream Repubs, but it has been said. You know that your candidate is proposing more regulations as well, don't you? Do you not feel that more regulation is now necessary because of what has happened, or do you think things would "straighten out" on their own without government assistance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jess Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Yesterday on 60 Minutes, John McCain said if he were elected he would appoint Andrew Cuomo to his Cabinet and put him in charge of the mortgage crisis, do you think that shows good judgement on John McCain's part? I think it is much like his VP choice, something he did independent of judgement and just to try to get elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members George008 Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Yeah I guess Obama doesn't have the monopoly on the rock star market any longer. I know..that's why I used it as an example.. I know. I'm not happy about that..From what I have heard, however, it is not to the same extent that Dems are calling for. This financial crisis would never have happened if we had not entered the subprime mess...The subprime crisis was furthered because of government musings in the past..Now they have an excuse to add more regulation (Reps and Dems!)..This is NOT the free market's fault IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Wow. Thanks, Jess. I didn't see 60 Minutes yesterday. I'm speechless. How do you feel about my earlier post regarding Dems and CEO pay/severence pay? Would you agree with their position on that issue? I can see now that you are a very staunch free market advocate. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it explains quite a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Going along with our discussion of the financial crisis, a commentary by Ed Rollins that is very unbiased, believe it or not.... McCain, Obama botching responses to crisis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 Now let me see here. When the government uses tax payers' money to take control of financial institutions, that sounds like a form of........ Socialism. Hmmmmm.........interesting. But what conversation is going on? Once again, it's calling Obama a "rock star" because thousands of people want to hear what he has to say. And why? Because some of those making the argument can't come up with too much on why John McCain should be the nations next president. I now sit back and wait for proof, while holding my breath, that John McCain has a paln. (Right before I start holding my breath, and before my demise, I would to thank those who posted on my behalf. You sacrifice.....OUR sacrifice, made the discussion possible.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=8374 Yes, There Are Deeply Angry Democratic Members of Congress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted September 22, 2008 Members Share Posted September 22, 2008 You can go solo on with that plan. I don't do political campaign volunteering. The only time I might be prompted is if it has to do with prevention of harmful legislation or implementation of some critical legislation. The less I know about a politician....the better off I am. The media has nothing to do but maybe they're trying to make a point about who is more out of touch with the every day person in terms of material possessions. Anyhow, I don't care how many things they have or do not have unless it's weapons or unless they've acquired them illegally.....as long as they're not fleecing the taxpayers then they should live the fabulous life like other people want to do or are doing. I'm not going to pick on any one for jet fuel consumption when I have a governor who talks about cleaning up the environment but burns up the air on his private plane going from Sacramento to Brentwood because he promised his kids to be home before bedtime or their homework is done or whatever he said that I didn't retain. It's sweet and all that....so since Obama is on a mission to be the next President then methinks he needs to burn fuel making the national rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.