U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:28 PM
Noc
 
1,435 posts, read 1,992,208 times
Reputation: 613

Advertisements

Bro you have all your info screwed up.

But I do agree that the Gov't caused this mess. Good old Dubbya.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:29 PM
 
82,641 posts, read 39,837,956 times
Reputation: 12162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noc View Post
Point is McCain and his poor judgment cost tax payer $3.2 billion.
You mean DeConcini, Cranston, and Riegle (all Democrats) cost the taxpayers $3.2 billion. McCain was exonerated.

Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:36 PM
 
69,366 posts, read 61,759,055 times
Reputation: 9382
Quote:
Originally Posted by domergurl View Post
You didn't watch 60 minutes did you ... the swaps market is NOT regulated. It was called swaps because it wouldn't be regulated.

A Look At Wall Street's Shadow Market, 60 Minutes: How Some Arcane Wall Street Financial Instruments Magnified Economic Crisis - CBS News
Yes, I know all about the packaging of mortgages and re-selling them. The market was NEVER regulated to begin with, so you cant de-regulate something that was never regulated. In addition. The story itself states exactly what I stated..

He says it didn't have to happen, that this disaster was created entirely by Wall Street itself, during a time of relative prosperity. And they did it by placing a trillion dollar bet, with mostly borrowed money, that the riskiest mortgages in the country could be turned into gold-plated investments.

Mae/Mac were one of the biggest buyers of these mortgages, they did it with borrowed funds, using the federal governments "credit" as a justification to get lower interest rates. These lower interest rates were supposed to be justification for taking on the higher risked loans because they money they would lose with the higher risked loans, they could make up by re-investing the funds into other safer securities.

The GOVERNMENT caused this problem, not the solution.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:38 PM
 
69,366 posts, read 61,759,055 times
Reputation: 9382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noc View Post
Bro you have all your info screwed up.

But I do agree that the Gov't caused this mess. Good old Dubbya.
This problem goes back way before Bush... Nice try at finger pointing though..

Other then that, what info do I have screwed up exactly? (note, I'm going through the federal process to start my own bank, been going through it since 2006, so before you begin to tell me how easy the process is, your talking to someone going through it right now).
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Old Town Alexandria
14,499 posts, read 25,755,160 times
Reputation: 8943
Quote:
Originally Posted by domergurl View Post
Keating Economics (http://keatingeconomics.com/ - broken link)
Thanks- I emailed 500 people!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:49 PM
 
573 posts, read 740,840 times
Reputation: 199
190,000 Youtube views in "3" hours!

Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:49 PM
 
Location: If I tell ya I got to kill ya!
218 posts, read 525,697 times
Reputation: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
I'm a little confused, isnt it the Obama campaign and the Democrats claiming that "guilt by association" isnt fair?

In addition, the website says that "the Keating scandal is eerily similar to today's credit crisis, where a lack of regulation and cozy relationships between the financial industry and Congress has allowed to the banks to make risky loans and profit by bending the rules."

Wrong.. The Keating scandal was caused by a lack of regulation, the current scandal is caused by providing to much capital to special governmental entitlements that Mae/Mac had, while over regulating the rest of the financial industry. The collapse took place when the government put into place socialism, (not the free market) by having the government buy up notes and debt encouraged by greed.

But wasnt the Savings and loan crisis of the past helped the govt to sponsor freddie and fannie and to bail out this industry? also since the Great Depression, wasnt the banking industry regulated but over the years de-regulation occured in the 70's, 80's, and 90's?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 02:53 PM
 
69,366 posts, read 61,759,055 times
Reputation: 9382
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Arrogance View Post
But wasnt the Savings and loan crisis of the past helped the govt to sponsor freddie and fannie and to bail out this industry? also since the Great Depression, wasnt the banking industry regulated but over the years de-regulation occured in the 70's, 80's, and 90's?
The S&L crisis of the 80's were due to bank owners ignoring the banking rules and regulation put into place, and were due to bank owners selling junk bonds in order to purchase more banks. (primarily the banking rules that were ignore was limitations on how banks could invest the proceeds/deposits). They would setup dummy corporations, loan money to the corporations, but wait, those dummy corporations were owned by the same individuals who owned the bank... Illegal then, and illegal now...

The primary deregulation that has taken place over the last 15 years, was signed into law by Clinton, which removed some restrictions upon the type of co-ownership agreements banks could have with insurance, and other investment markets. Again, not the problem we are having today, which is primarily dried up funds because of an over inflated market.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 03:00 PM
 
1,544 posts, read 1,999,010 times
Reputation: 276
McCAIN found NOT GUILTY!!!!!!!!!

Next smear?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2008, 03:05 PM
 
1,648 posts, read 2,482,565 times
Reputation: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoppingCartLaw View Post
McCAIN found NOT GUILTY!!!!!!!!!

Next smear?
right ...weird defense (and very hypocritical) from the folks who keeps hurling guilt-by-association accusations to the other side ... and McBush wasn't just associating, he was knee deep in the scandal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top