Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chickenman

The Great Depression 2: Depression Harder

Recommended Posts

Chickenman

Thoughts? I'm admittedly not as up to speed on this particular issue as I should be, but I will say this:

That damned socialist, President Bush, is using our hard earned tax money to bail out corporations. It's only a matter of time before we go from being America, to Communerica! Am I right??? Let the free market decide if we lose all of our money or not!

:p

*Chickenman probably knows even less about the economy now than he did at the beginning of this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy

But if the government doesn't bail out the failing financial sector, then the crash would only get worse.

Coincidentally, a programme about the credit crunch has just come on TV, lol.

But yeah, it's the governments fault for turning a blind eye to what the financial corporations were doing for the short term benefits we have enjoyed over the past few years. If they had ensured the banks were regulated properly this wouldn't have happened.

We probably wouldn't be as well-off now, but if the world economy crashes now then that wouldn't seem so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

But the crash would happen because the free market decided it would crash. That's Freedom, Beeurd. Taste it. Taste the freedom!

We'll be poor and making food out of clothing, but at least we won't be Commies! ;) :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

yet another example of how the government rewards irresponsibility. i'm not entirely sure how i would rather they handle this either. no, i don't want them bailing out these large corporations with my tax dollars. they made this mess, they need to take responsibility for it. but at the same time, i don't want the entire economy to collapse and burn. maybe restricted privileges for companies the gubment has to bail out? i dunno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

Indeed. There's no perfect answer.

It just amuses me that the guy who ran on a platform of smaller government has increased the power of the Executive Branch 1000% and is now buying up companies. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Princess

Something has to be done to keep us from totally collapsing or from the entire world market from collapsing. Things are crazy right now because the stock markets don't like change and we've been going through an election for two and a half years. Things will settle down once the election happens. In the meantime we have to have responsible spending and saving habits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

what is this responsible word you said? :p

i hope it calms down, but even when it does, the root problems that caused this mess won't go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheUnknown

Notice which party controlled the Presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court leading up to the Depression. Notice which party, until recently, controlled the Presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court. Coincidence? I think not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

They inherited a recession. Duh.

Oh wait, the recession started after Bush was in the White House?

Err...Gay Marriage! *runs away*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ender

Hmm... giving $85 billion to a company that just proved it can't handle money... does that make any sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheUnknown

Hmm... giving $85 billion to a company that just proved it can't handle money... does that make any sense?

And yet a program to ensure every American has access to healthcare is dirty, unAmerican socialism. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

i've heard that wait times for proceedures in Canada are horrendously long. several months for knee replacements or heart bypasses. any truth to that, Drake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

throw on a white lab coat and a stethescope and no one could tell the difference. :p

just wondering if you'd had a family member/friend have this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad furday

I'd look like a doctor in a white lab coat and stethoscope! Next time you need treatment fast, I'll put on the costume and

people will assume that I'm a doctor and you'll be rushed to the head of the line! ;);) :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheUnknown

It seems Americans b**** more about Canadian healthcare than Canadians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drake

Although, I wouldn't be at all surprised if most of it is just rumours being spread to make our system look worse than your lack of one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

i definitely agree our healthcare "system" needs a major overhaul. i'm just not convinced that socialized healthcare is the answer. i can barely afford my own insurance, let alone everyone else's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue Lead

Notice which party controlled the Presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court leading up to the Depression. Notice which party, until recently, controlled the Presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court. Coincidence? I think not.

Oh please :roll:

This entire crisis belongs to the Democrats lock stock and barrel.

It began in 1977, when Democrat Jimmy Carter was President with the Community Reinvestment Act(CRA) was passed. Simple, noble-minded bill. The law mandates that ?each banking institution be evaluated to determine if it has met the credit needs of it?s entire community?, in other words, it outlawed "redlining" that is basically a form of profiling aka, only loaning to areas where there was no risk of the loan not being paid back.

Then in 1995, Democrat President Bill Clinton, with the idea of extending the American Dream of home-owner ship to all income ranges, including the ones who couldn't afford it, revised the bill to now require that banks make loans to people with little, no or bad credit. Not only require it, but also increase the number of CRA loans to low-income aka, the people who probably wouldn't be able to pay it back. It allowed companies to now securitize these CRA loans aka "sub-prime mortgages"

The first company to do so was Bear Stearns.

And they were so happy about it back then, quoting the article: "CRA loans are loans targeted to low and moderate income borrowers and neighborhoods under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

"The securitization of these affordable mortgages allows us to redeploy capital back into our communities and to expand our ability to provide credit to low and moderate income individuals," said Jane Henderson, managing director of First Union's Community Reinvestment and Fair Lending Programs. "First Union is committed to promoting home ownership in traditionally underserved markets through a comprehensive line of competitive and flexible affordable mortgage products. This transaction enables us to continue to aggressively serve those markets."

From the beginning this was opposed by many and in 2003, Republican President George W. Bush proposed a complete overhaul, called by the New York Times as the "...the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.", of the CRA requiring the two largest sub-prime mortage holders, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (boy all these names sure sound familiar) submit to greater oversight and begin to take action on securing this debt.

Quoting from the article: "The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates."

Guess what happened? The legislation was blocked by a party line vote, opposed by Democrats. Why? Quoting the NYT again: "Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said."

In fact, a few weeks later, Barney Frank, Democrat, told the AP: "I don?t think we face a crisis. I don?t think we have an impending disaster.? In a way he was right, the disaster wasn't impending...it took about 5 years.

Two years later, in 2005, Republicans tried again, one of those I might add was Arizona Senator John McCain. And again it was blocked by Democrats, quoting Minority (now Majority) Leader Harry Reid: "The legislation from the Senate Banking Committee passed today on a party-line vote by the Republican majority, includes measures that could cripple the ability of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to carry out their mission of expanding home ownership. While I favor approving oversight by our federal housing regulators, to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process?

It was opposed by Democrat Senator Chris Dodd, ranking member of the Banking Committee and I might add, highest receiver of donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. #2? Senator Barack Obama, Democrat, Illinois who didn't lift a FINGER to head off the crisis that now confronts us today.

I ain't making this s*** up. I've linked to the articles that prove my allegations. Bush and the Republicans tried to fix this looming Democrat-created problem two times in the last 5 years and were blocked at each and every turn by Democrats in Congress.

You wanna lay blame? Lay it where it belongs.

Edited by Rogue Lead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

had the system not been like it was, my husband probably wouldn't have gotten the loan he needed when he bought the house. even though he has been very responsible in paying it back--even so far as to forgoe dates so he can make an extra payment--he was considered a "high-risk" loan because of (i think) his student loans. he got a really crappy deal, too, but it's going to cost us a couple grand to get it refinanced.

i wholeheartedly agree that there are people who have no business being loaned anything. but you can't always tell who they are based on credit history alone. maybe in the revamping of the system, there should be some sort of trial period where you can get a partial loan, and then if you do well on paying it back, you get the full loan. it might not work, but perhaps it's worth looking into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue Lead

No offense Kits, but have you ever considered that maybe you two shouldn't have bought the house yet?

My parents didn't buy a house until they'd been married 20 years. I was 17 and my sister was 15. My wife and I live in an apartment and we're not planning on buying a house until we our credit card debit is paid off and we're both through with school.

My sister and her husband just bought a house, they've been married 5 years and they held off until they could put a decent down payment on it. They took a higher interest rate but it's a fixed mortgage as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.