Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lets see, we have liberals that invited the gvt with open arms to be involved in education and now are crying the blues for letting them get their foot in the door. Priceless, maybe they will think of Reagans words " I am from the gvt and I am here to help "
It's about the big picture and caring about the younger generation not having to mortgage their future to get an education and a decent job (many of which you cannot get without an education) so they can be productive members of society and contribute to the economy, not to the pocket of CEOs of the fast food industry. US corporations get all kinds of financial breaks. Students not so much.
I addressed the corporation aspects and why they are wrong. The government getting involved here has raised the price of an education. Anything the government subsidizes only gets more expensive. To see that colleges can continue to raise rates beyond inflation has nothing to do with religion.
Well, maybe it does but not the kind you are speaking about.
There are a bunch of reasons, one is the U S has rampant Mussolini fascism[ Co operation between the states and corporations} and the bankers Warren rails against owns both political parties. Plus the US gvt does not control the interest rate that would be the private federal reserve. Are we to expect the federal reserve to cut the throats of bankers with a rate hike? LMAO. Who's interest is more important to the FR and the U S gvt the big banks or the people?
The government appoints the person who decides the policies of the FR.
Very little interest and a very short time span.
And they were charged the interbank lending rate.
No they weren't in all cases plus they were provided this money to pump into things like commodities which brought them returns far above anything they were paying for the money.
Quote:
Hardly the same for comparison is it ?
That's sort of the point. Why should some get treated differently than others.
No they weren't in all cases plus they were provided this money to pump into things like commodities which brought them returns far above anything they were paying for the money.
That's sort of the point. Why should some get treated differently than others.
What they did with that money was up to them..remember "blank check" ?
But it was a short term loan with interbank rates.
All of that was spelled out in the bill which got voted YES.
No they weren't in all cases plus they were provided this money to pump into things like commodities which brought them returns far above anything they were paying for the money.
That's sort of the point. Why should some get treated differently than others.
That's life. We don't all get treated the same.
Banks and companies with deep coffers can't be compared to 18 year olds still living at home.
What they did with that money was up to them..remember "blank check" ?
But it was a short term loan with interbank rates.
All of that was spelled out in the bill which got voted YES.
Did you get a "blank check"?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
