Republicans how you going to save our homes and bank accounts>?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by gardener, Feb 8, 2009.

  1. gardener

    gardener Realistic Humanist

    Heard lots about how the denicrats were are you going to make things right. I'd like to see an outline., Come on McCain...outline it for us, please.
  2. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Why are you feeding into the Democrat/Republican divide? Certainly the proposed "solution" the Democrats have is not going to solve anything, but only make the problem worse. If they really wanted to stimulate the economy -- which they don't -- they would give the 800 billion to the people instead of putting it into something that will have no impact on the economy whatsoever. Instead of bailing out the corporations, they would be bailing out the average person.

    The Dems and Reps are two teams belonging to the same owners. The Republicans (knowingly or unknowingly) simply provide the facade of opposition. I could see McCain putting forward the same (or at least very similar) "stimulus" package if he were in office.
  3. Aristartle

    Aristartle Snow Falling on Cedars Lifetime Supporter

    Well, the republicans slashed aid to state governments through all this deliberation. In favor of stuff that's only useful to rich people.

    Given the choice between passing a good bill, a bad bill, and nothing, Congress inevitably chooses the bad bill.

    In Canada, the government is finally capping the pay day loans here, at 21% interest too. Hopefully that will prevent some people from getting into obscene amounts of debt. Poor people and people unable to get a bank account were being charged large amounts of interest, so now they will finally be regulated.

    I know in the USA you guys don't have the cash loan industry regulated. In fact, iirc, every time state or local governments tried to pass laws regulating them they always got shot down by the feds. Thanks a lot, Bush administration. They're basically loan sharks with a facade.

    So, it would make sense to like, regulate them.
  4. Piney

    Piney Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    At first. I thought this thread was older, like when Rebuplicans were in power in Washington. Unlike these days where Republicans are in minority status. They are able to offer critique as to what is going on as opposed to the media cheerleading we get on the talkies.

    Eight Hundred Billion Dollars is a lot of money. I'll bet that there are plenty of "Bridges to Nowhere" hidden in the Subsidy bill.

    Cheers to anybody who will take a whack at it, Republican, Democrat, anybody.

    I dont want the entire nation to end up like California or New York. Where bloated goverment cannot say no to goverment interests, Where I-Pod downloads and soda are taxed, Where roadways are pawned off to private companies,Where very high property tax is excused by the reasoning that its a write-off on federal taxes.

    How about half a subsidy bill.
  5. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    If anything needs to be regulated it's the Federal Reserve. Of course that won't happen.
  6. gardener

    gardener Realistic Humanist

    As long as they won't make hedge funds transparent, that's exactly what they are.
  7. Aristartle

    Aristartle Snow Falling on Cedars Lifetime Supporter

    Yeah, I hear ya.

    In Canada they banned zero down mortgages, so at least we had that scheme market regulated.

    I'm wishing y'all the best, really.
  8. Hiptastic

    Hiptastic Unhedged

    What the heck does hedge fund transparency have to do with loan sharking?
  9. Aristartle

    Aristartle Snow Falling on Cedars Lifetime Supporter

    Making profits on risk assessments.
  10. Hiptastic

    Hiptastic Unhedged

    I can tell when you are bluffing.
  11. Aristartle

    Aristartle Snow Falling on Cedars Lifetime Supporter

    What's it called when you create formulas for risk?

    Not risk theory... I am drawing a blank here. Help me out.

    Like, lending and creditor risk calculations. Not like a credit rating or an internal score for lending criteria, but the risk of lending vs the risk of 0 payback?

    Loan sharks and hedge funds over calculate the risk in the rate of payback.

    Man, I totally have to take an economics class sometime. It's like another language. I just stumble through everything.
  12. Hiptastic

    Hiptastic Unhedged

    I think you are saying they underestimated the risk but I'm still lost as to how hedge funds and transparency and loan sharking fit it.
  13. Aristartle

    Aristartle Snow Falling on Cedars Lifetime Supporter

    No, I mean that they over-calculate the risks intentionally.

    Oh, come'on. You're not trying hard enough to find a similar pattern that generates an undesirable result in both schemes.

    One's a money making trade market trap for the rich, and the other is a money making trap for the poor. Both are still traps that profit from unregulated risk percentages and whimsical ad hoc gain formulas.
  14. Hiptastic

    Hiptastic Unhedged

    This is not a real concept, this is random key words thrown together. Over calculating doesn't make sense either.


    How about those coneheads though. They never rerun that movie on UK channels, which is a shame.
  15. Aristartle

    Aristartle Snow Falling on Cedars Lifetime Supporter

    You're being defiant and stubborn.

    But yes, your econo-speak savour trumps la manière que tu m'emmerdes!

    So do you watch Corrie Street or Top Gear like it's a national sport? What shows do you watch there?
  16. gardener

    gardener Realistic Humanist

    Has more to do with what industries and interests they have invested in. If transparency was in place then the voting public and investors would be aware of why certain lobbies have more clout then others.
  17. HawaiianEye

    HawaiianEye Member

    Republicans only will save the homes(mansions) and bank accounts of the ultra wealthy.They are a party whose ONLY function is to represent the rich,and thats it.And I'm no big fan of the democrats either.
  18. DaveHT

    DaveHT Member

    Bush pussed for the first bailout...and got a 'somewhat' watered down one. Now Obamba is pushing for a second bailout.

    Makes no difference which party is leading, they both want to keep the system running as is without much change. Either way they are both screwed (not as individuals, but as leaders) as the system will change...and the taxpayer will pay for it both ways. The best either one could do is hold on to the current system for as long as possible to try and avoid the bankrupcy of the entire nation and of the world.

    When countries start declaring bankrupcy (and it will happen a lot) the entire system will change for the better or the worse. Either way the system that emerges will be better for some people than others.
  19. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Yeah, I mean, Obama is just furthering what Bush started. It's definitely not change.
  20. gardener

    gardener Realistic Humanist

    Yeah they may not be raising taxes in Washington but by slashing state aid, the working man in California will now be paying more sales tax, 12 more cents per dollar on gas, state income tax is going up.

    Cuts in the following areas:

    And our legislature threw in this:

    Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice