Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 09-16-2010, 08:50 AM
 
10,854 posts, read 9,266,956 times
Reputation: 3122

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by calmdude View Post
Let's get rid of the FDA also. The only thing their actions result in is increased costs for big pharma. Without quality control, I am sure the Chinese could give us high quality, uncontaminated pills. That will be pro-business.
You kidding, right!

One of the biggest problems in undeveloped countries is the same of counterfeit drugs and medicines. Drug dealers are actually stopping selling illegal drugs and switching to selling counterfeit drugs because it's as profitable as illegal drugs, the risk of getting caught is lower and the penalties when you get caught aren't as severe.

As bad as things are with the FDA, it would be worse without it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-16-2010, 08:58 AM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,025,108 times
Reputation: 11091
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
You kidding, right!

One of the biggest problems in undeveloped countries is the same of counterfeit drugs and medicines. Drug dealers are actually stopping selling illegal drugs and switching to selling counterfeit drugs because it's as profitable as illegal drugs, the risk of getting caught is lower and the penalties when you get caught aren't as severe.

As bad as things are with the FDA, it would be worse without it.
calmdude was just being sarcastic in response to a typical "anything Obama does is wrong" post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 09:05 AM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,025,108 times
Reputation: 11091
Quote:
Originally Posted by LibertarianMan View Post
HAHAHA- and look what happened to Spitzer.

If you think this little Woman is going to bring down the Big Banks you need a reality check.

The only thing that will bring down the big banks is themselves at this point. Because I do not think America will stand for another wall st bail out.
Who's talking about bringing down anything? But if nothng else, Warren will see to it that consumers have a contract that is not written purposely to be complicated with the intentions to defraud.

From a really great interview with Warren on "Frontline".....

I believe in free markets. I teach contract law; I believe that value is created when two people come together, and they understand a contract, and they say, "I think if I borrow this much money at this interest rate, I can do better than that; I can start a business; I can buy something I want to buy that's going to be important to me, and I can make money out of this proposition." That is a good use of credit. It's a use of credit we've had in the United States since colonial times.

What's changed is [that] when credit was deregulated in the early 1980s, the contracts began to shift. And what happens is that the big issuers, the credit card companies who have the team of lawyers, started writing contracts that effectively said, "Here are some of the terms, and the rest of the terms will be whatever we want them to be." And so they would loan to someone at 9.9 percent interest. That's what it said on the front of the envelope. But it was 9.9 percent interest ... unless you lost your job, or 9.9 percent interest unless you applied for a couple of other credit cards, or 9.9 percent interest unless you defaulted on some other obligation somewhere else that doesn't cost me a nickel. And at that moment, that 9.9 percent interest credit suddenly morphs to 24.9 percent interest, 29.9 percent interest, 36.9 percent interest. Well, you know, ... nobody signs contracts to buy things that say, "I'm going to pay you $1,200 for the big-screen TV unless you decide, in another month or two months, that it should really be $3,600 or $4,200 or $4,800." But that's precisely how credit card contracts are written today.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/warren.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 09:11 AM
 
4,173 posts, read 6,666,419 times
Reputation: 1216
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
You kidding, right!

One of the biggest problems in undeveloped countries is the same of counterfeit drugs and medicines. Drug dealers are actually stopping selling illegal drugs and switching to selling counterfeit drugs because it's as profitable as illegal drugs, the risk of getting caught is lower and the penalties when you get caught aren't as severe.

As bad as things are with the FDA, it would be worse without it.
Yes. Either that, or based on my other posts, I am a disorganized schizo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
7,168 posts, read 5,342,518 times
Reputation: 2922
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
Says much about Warren that the banking industry does not like her. Much like Wall Street hated and feared Spitzer. I saw a documentary about her awhile back. She is brilliant and amazing. This is good news.
I would not put too much stock into the banksters do not like her it could be the double switch ploy that they have used before. Ever study how the FR came into existence? The original bill was crafted by Aldridge {D} and the banksters were all for it and chomping at the bit for it too pass. It failed.
The switch came where they took the same bill put some lip stick on it and gave it a different name. This time the banksters came out in strong opposition, there was fake wailing and gnashing of teeth. Behind the scenes that was the plan if Wall street did not like it then it must be good for main street.
Of course the congress gave the people a early Xmas present and 2 days before the bill was passed and the banksters and the FR have been helping to run this country into the ground since.
Is this another switch? I do not know have to wait to see the results. What have the results been for the Obama pay czar who supposedly was going after the banksters bonuses after we bailed them out. They were pathetic, the banksters held onto all their bonus money and the only change is they had to take stock options and hold them for 3 years. So whats the score?, to me it is banksters 1 main street nothing.
Common sense tells me the banksters have nothing to worry about, from your own article it said they have the biggest lobbying operation in DC. Our leaders will not bite the hand that feeds them so they love the banksters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 09:15 AM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,025,108 times
Reputation: 11091
Quote:
Originally Posted by reid_g View Post
I take caution before jumping on band wagons and for good reasons such as what are the results. I know who Warren is and I have seen her on Cspan and I am aware of what her intentions are. I am also aware of how much power the banksters and the FR have over our leaders, notice they did not name her as the head but gave her a adviser position.
Look who she is under? none other then a bankster and former FR Getihner, does she have any real power? or did the banksters hold onto theirs with their boy Geithner?
Lets review what she has done so far, she was in charge of meetings concerning the TARP bail out. One of her big disclosures was that TBTF banks received dollar for dollar for their toxic assets. Wow, this is really something this was reported back in 2009 and myself with a scant education knew this with out a bunch of useless hearings.
Don't you remember Barnanke saying we do not know how to value these assets and of course they were valued at 100% since the tax payers were picking up the bill. What has been done about that? nothing but a bunch of empty talk at some meeting where she looked tough? The banksters still got their loot and it still is on our tab.
With her being under Geithner and maybe later if she is appointed she will be part of the FR. Someone tell me what she is going to do? Besides growing the gvt and spending 500 million dollars what is going to be the outcome?
Tim Geithner Trying to Stop Elizabeth Warren from Heading Consumer Protection Bureau

It’s no secret the watchdog and the Treasury Secretary have had a tenuous relationship. Geithner’s critics have enjoyed watching Warren question him during his four appearances before her panel. Her tough, probing questions on the Wall Street bailout and his role in it — often delivered with a smile — are featured on YouTube. One video is headlined “Elizabeth Warren Makes Timmy Geithner Squirm.”
Tim Geithner Trying to Stop Elizabeth Warren from Heading Consumer Protection Bureau | FDL News Desk

Elizabeth Warren Makes Timmy Geithner Squirm Over AIG and Goldman Sachs Bailouts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz7ruJw6byQ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 12:17 PM
 
12,270 posts, read 11,277,678 times
Reputation: 8065
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
No, she's actually a woman that is looking out for the consumer. Why would anyone have a problem with that and equate that to hating big business and hurting the job market?
I suspect what most consumers would like right now is a job, and could care less about Elizabeth Warren.

Except for the liberals on C-D, do you seriously think America wants another anti-business academic working for Obama? This is how he's going to focus on jobs, jobs, jobs and fix the economy?

I have never bought into the Cloward and Piven idea that Obama is trying to purposefully overwhelm the US economy to create systemic failure and destroy capitalism...he did take an oath to protect and defend...but what the hell is he doing?

Lately I'm starting to wonder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 12:50 PM
 
5,764 posts, read 11,595,435 times
Reputation: 3869
It's interesting that you'd call Warren "anti-business," when in fact, her proposals may actually save the financial industry from itself in the future.

Remember, only a decade ago, all the "pro-business" folks were yelling about how things like derivatives didn't even need to be regulated. Because that would be "anti-business."

And they'd have gotten their comeuppance, too, except that all those uber-capitalists then switched over to welfare mode and demanded taxpayer bailouts to keep their companies afloat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 01:32 PM
 
27,625 posts, read 21,025,108 times
Reputation: 11091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside View Post
I suspect what most consumers would like right now is a job, and could care less about Elizabeth Warren.

Except for the liberals on C-D, do you seriously think America wants another anti-business academic working for Obama? This is how he's going to focus on jobs, jobs, jobs and fix the economy?

I have never bought into the Cloward and Piven idea that Obama is trying to purposefully overwhelm the US economy to create systemic failure and destroy capitalism...he did take an oath to protect and defend...but what the hell is he doing?

Lately I'm starting to wonder.
Haven't heard or read much about Warren, have you? Par for the course. You have not replied directly to anything posted about her on this thread. No surprises there though. Your anti Obama rants are so over the top that whatever you say on this issue are so obviously biased. Never learned to give credit where credit us due...have you? The agency to protect consumers from predatory lending is set up, Warren will have A pivotal role and she is the right woman for the job. No matter how you spin this, your points are moot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 02:26 PM
 
12,270 posts, read 11,277,678 times
Reputation: 8065
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
Warren will have A pivotal role and she is the right woman for the job. No matter how you spin this, your points are moot.
Pivotal? Geithner doesn't like her, the very liberal Chris Dodd won't endorse her, and she is such a controversial figure that Obama could only give her a special advisory role because he knew she would never get through a senate confirmation hearing.

That should tell you libs one big important thing...Obama didn't want confirmation hearings because hearings of this nature are broadcast to the public, and the public would have had a fit.

Elizabeth Warren is not what this country needs, but I hope he keeps appointing people like her, because 2012 is suddenly not that far away.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:10 AM.

© 2005-2024, 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