Thank a liberal

Hmmm.. so is "she" the right word? Did Sue used to be Robert, or is Sue about to become Robert? The OP didn't say.

 

She is multi-gender. She is a female dog trapped in a mans body. She has felt this way ever since she was a puppy!

 

Animal neglect is real and no laughing matter. Poor Sue.

 

It's not the loan's, per se, that caused the crisis, banks could have absorbed those losses, but the CFMA allowed banks to get involved with exotic investments, i.e., derivatives, default swaps, and all sorts of exotic speculation where they packaged those loans as collateral and the derivatives, and the default swaps as a back up to those, which allowed speculation into the stratosphere.

THAT's what caused the crash. It all started with the NEOLIBERAL Commodity Futures Modernization Act, CFMA. Neoliberalism was Rampant during the 90s, remember? Ginrich, Repubs? I blame the neoliberal republicans for writing the bill, and neoliberal Bill Clinton for signing it. They did give us a surplus, that was good, but Bush killed the surplus with the two wars.

 

Your subsequent quotes are not mine.

Please make sure whom you are quoting is apparent within your quotes. Thank you.

 

An interesting thing about the credit crisis is that the market has well-established procedures for handling such events. Instead of taxpayers bailing out bad actors like BofA, Citi, Goldman, JP Morgan, and others, they could have simply followed an orderly process of unwinding those organizations. But, the politically connected ran to Congress and Congress screwed the taxpayers. Even Obama left the campaign trail to rush back to DC to vote for the bailouts.

1) Announce that customers' deposits with these institutions are indeed FDIC insured. Make an exception for the $200,000 limit if needed.
2) Place the bad banks in bankruptcy.
3) Those banks sell their assets at an auction - auto loans, mortgages, etc., would have been sold for less than the face amount of the note. A $500,000 mortgage might have sold for 60-80 cents on the dollar.
4) Buyers (banks that didn't take crazy risks) of these mortgages could have then renegotiated risky mortgages into lower amounts, thus preventing defaults. Bank buys a $500,000 mortgage for $300,000 and tells the borrower they can reduce the principle to $400,000, as an example.
5) Of course, investors in the bad banks would end up losing their investment, which is a risk of investing.

This could have been done, at very little cost to the taxpayers compared to the bipartisan bailouts.

The bailouts should leave a bitter taste in everyone's mouth. It was not a liberal thing to do. It was not a free market thing to do. The "too big to fail" mantra was complete BS.

 

No one is arguing against nor denying the contribution of capitalism. Jeez, you guys never get it right.

reread my post to which @AmericanNationalist responded, and listen to the video linked to, as your reply is a kneejerk response.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/thank-a-liberal.587445/page-3#post-1072599567

Do it or stay out of the conversation. Please.

 

They were preceded by a hyperlink.

When quotes follow a hyperlink, it's a quote of the hyperlink. This is known. Thank you.

 

Get off your high horse and take a seat for I was responding to the American Nationalist in post #57 where he said capitalism's shortcoming is focused too much on monetary value, and where I responded by telling him its the capitalists who produce the jobs and products to secure their livelihoods from that trickle down process.

If you can't focus on or have a problem or disagreement with a poster's response to another poster who happens to be someone other than yourself, then I say stay out of the conversation. Please.

 

Oh please, debts have soared under republican and democrat administrations. The four biggest offenders, two of them are republicans.
Debt is a bipartisan effort. So you're going to whine about dems did more?

that's rich considering Repubs are bent on destroying democracy as we speak.

 

Notice how your quote is sourced at the top? "Zorro said" That's courtesy.


No, it's courtesy to source the link I( there are no links in the quote ) and you do that by including the header of the comment to which you are responding, and the ones that follow that do not have the header will be assumed to belong to the one that does have the header, and we do this so it's visible so no casual glancers will assume the quote belongs to the first guy at the top.

Not every one checks links.

It's only courtesy.

 

Now wait a minute, he said my post was enlightening, and you said you 'couldn't disagree more'.

That implies you are disagreeing with my post. That is why I wrote what I wrote.

But, in the event you are solely disagreeing with AN, then you have assumed what the conversation is about and disagreeing with AN without considering what he was responding to means you are missing a deeper point, of which one point is no one is trying to do away with capitalism, no one is saying capitalism doesn't produce wealth or innovation. Otherwise, why the little lecture on capitalism?

I invite you to read what AN was responding to, because if you had, it would have preempted any need to lecture anyone on 'capitalism'.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/thank-a-liberal.587445/page-3#post-1072599567

 

I've lived most of my life in CA. I've lived in TX, FLA, LA, MS, NY, IN.
I'll take California any day of the week over any other state, Maybe Hawaii, but that's it.
I live in San Diego. Where do you live?
Sue loves it here. In fact, since 1900, there have been more republican governors than democrat. Reagan was governor here, remember?
Yes, gas is high, but a Rolls Royce cost more than a Volkswagen and your point is? Antidepressants are a national problem.
Your rebuttal really misses the point, and your rebuttal are a series of strawman arguments, none of which actually refute the premise of the OP.

 

Your Quote was labeled the same in my reply:

I did source the link. Here it is again.

The Democrat Party is under the power of Authoritarians and is the Extremist Party.

See how it is colored differently and when you hover over it, your cursor changes? And how when you click on it, it takes you to the source being quoted?

Not when it follows a hyperlink.

Their cursor their choice.

If they chose not to check a link that shows no disrespect to anyone. They could have a million valid reasons for making that choice, which they are free to make. You should probably be a little more careful in your accusations of others.

We have folks claiming the label of "Liberal" that are actually small-minded Authoritarians. Yes, American Liberal Constitutional Democracy has been a tremendous force for Liberation, but the Progressives that stole the label and have seized power in the Media, Federal Agencies and the Democrat Party? Small-minded, self-righteous, thin-skinned busy-body autocrats. I'm not sure that even the Democrat rank and file base likes them. Dems losing 30-40 seats in the upcoming Congressional Elections wouldn't surprise me at all. Freedom and Liberty Republicans will likely continue their march through the State Legislatures as well.

These State Legislatures are important. If we can't get our federal Congress to reassert Constitutional Controls over the Federal Government, 34 State Legislatures, acting jointly may draft and circulate Constitutional Amendments for ratification.

You want to thank a liberal? Thank anyone of the long train of Americans who have more perfectly secured the inherent rights of the governed, which is the purpose of our government. It's not to implement the pipedreams of "progressive" Authoritarians through government force. These folks should learn to manage their own lives rather than being so focused on managing the lives of others.

34 Million Fewer People Watched Biden Speech Compared To Trump's First SOTU

You are pretending that this charade is working for you and it's a dismal flop. Folks aren't watching the clown show of the three stooges anymore than they are watching the Oscars. Those folks don't like us, they make that clear, and we don't care much for them, which is why we don't tune in to hear them lie about and slander us.

If "progressives" would have listened to James Carville and run from, rather than passed the Assault Weapons Ban in 1993, you wouldn't be bitching today about losing the majority of the majority of the States. Now Carville is warning you folks again, and again you will ignore the warning and pay the price. These "progressives" that are temporarily in charge, do not care for feedback. They do not show any signs of self-reflection or any of the other basic skills that allow one to assess their positions against real world information and make the necessary corrections to appeal to the majority in a majority of the States

James Carville: 'Wokeness Is A Problem And We All Know It'

Fear not, the voters are going to tell them. Liberals? We are fine with. Our Liberal Constitutional Democracy is fabulous. These petty little tyrant "Progressives" that claim the label? They fool no one. The LAST thing these clowns are is "liberal". They tend to be nasty, mean, slanderous, small-minded, race-baiters, untruthful. Not nice folks at all.

 

That's rich.
https://www.npr.org/2021/01/13/9565...sis-including-former-michigan-gov-rick-snyder

Everyone needs health care. To keep the cost down for everyone, it's only fair that everyone contribute to a common fund.
To 'not pay for it at 22' then pay for it at '65' means it will be astronomically expensive at 65, when you most need it and can least afford it.
Someone who is 22 won't need it as much, but they still need it, you never know when you could get an accident, or a catastrophic disease.
Everyone needs health care.
Moreover, with union fought for benefits, there is no evidence their wages would be higher without the union, and, in fact, people who are union members their wages, on the average, are higher than their non-union counterparts. Evidence given, read on.

I'm against unneeded regulation, but this idea that an industry is going to self regulate in a way that is in the best interest of the nation, I'm not buying that. Let me guess, you are a libertarian?

So, you are claiming a product, unregulated will be $1.50, but $3.50 after regulation?
I don't buy that for a minute.

https://www.mercatus.org/publicatio...ns-affect-consumer-prices-analysis-regressive
Key Findings
[...]
Comparing the growth rate of prices over time against the growth rate of regulations over time, the data show that a 10 percent increase in total regulations leads to a 0.687 percent increase in consumer prices.

The articles seems to agree with you that regulations affect the poor the most, but, they argue against themselves as the cost of regulation
isn't as high as you suggest, it's not that high at all.

So, the question that remains is, do the regulations protect us and is the cost of that regulation worth it?
I'd say at a cost that is substantially less than one percent, I'd say yes. But, I do agree that regulations should be reviewed for their wisdom, from time to time. Not all regulations are necessary, no doubt many are not. But, some are, but killing regulations blindly, like Trump did was not a good idea, either.

No, because urban areas tend to be liberal strongholds where there are more cars. It is apples and oranges comparing urban areas, 'liberal strongholds' to rural areas, conservative strongholds.

Air quality in CA has greatly improved since the 40s. Emissions controls work. I remember what it was like, I lived in Baldwin hills and Santa Ana as a child during the 50s, for a brief period. I have lived in CA since the 60s and most of my life. I have witnessed the gradual improvement of air quality in this state. Emission controls work.

It took some 50 years to do it, with republicans and democrats cooperating with science.

In San Diego, we have the Trolley and the Coaster. Very few robberies and murders. I'm all for a subsidized Uber system. Let's do it.

One word: Enron.
And you are wrong.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/04/art2full.pdf
Union workers continue to receive higher wages than nonunion workers and have greater access to most employer-sponsored employee benefi ts; during the 2001–2011 period, the differences between union and nonunion benefit cost levels appear to have widened

The goal of this public policy is to make sure everyone is covered in the workplace. Without the mandate, it would be hodge podge, some would, some wouldn't, and you have millions of workers not covered by some kind of insurance while they work, leaving taxpayers in emergency rooms to foot the bill at a much higher price.

The highest interest rates, with any stability, that I can recall, was around 4% and that was in the 60s. Repubs had plenty of opportunity to change the system. Did they? What did they do with all the power they had over the years, with the banking system?

The system has problems, no doubt, but most people pay back their loans.

the problem which mushroomed in 2008, started way back at the end of Clinton's term. when neoliberal repubs conned neoliberal Bill Clinton into signing the Commodity Futures Modernization ACT of 2000 which deregulated derivatives which lead to exotic speculation greatly contributing to the crash of 2008. Id' bet the system could have easily absorbed the bad loans were it not for the loans being packaged as collateral, and those being backed up with derivatives and credit default swaps into the stratosphere all of which was due to the CFMA, the flowerchild of neoliberal/libertarian thinking.

 

Of course not all "Progressives" just the ones with a totalitarian mindset that lay false claim to the "Liberal" label.

 

Yet 8 million more people voted for him.

Dems watch Oprah, listen to music, or are out having fun.

But, the 27 million who did watch it, thought......




What were the opinions of Trump's first SOTU?



Trump made 35% scared and angry. LOL!!!

 

that's not what I mean. When you quote someone, put the headers of the person you are quoting in the quote, so casual glancers
will know who you quoting.

See above where it says 'Zorro said' ? That's because I included your header in the quote, so everyone would know who I am quoting
and the reason I did that is OUT OF COURTESY
like so:


It's the quote header which gets marked up to 'Zorro said'. It is only needed to be done in the first of the series, where the remaining quotes will be assumed to belong to the first one whose header was included.

If you quote someone else in a long post, say, in addition to the first person ( me, in this case) and you don't do the above, again, with that new person, casual glancers will assume the quote belongs to the first one in the series of whose header you did post, and that's not fair. It's courtesy, Zorro. And not everyone clicks on links.

 

Nope, that's you guys

 

Honestly, we just want to be left the hell alone to do our thing, pay less taxes, and spend less money at the federal level.

 

Quick!!!! To the shower to extinguish your hair, it's on hyperbolic, drama fire!

 

I'll go with Fl. beaches, any day. I filled my tank the other day, 2.75$ a gallon.

 

Looks like you find anyone who wants to live their lives free of an intrusive anti Constitutional socialistic/governmental/Democrat run system to be funny. Wouldn't expect anything different coming from an anti American point of view.

 

Wouldn't expect anything less from a hater.