Posted by GinaZ
I agree with almost everything. I am not sure if this will be fixed better by Obama or McCain though- I still am waiting for the debates and need to do more reading up on it. I thought the letter made a lot of valued points though.
Posted by lizzie217
When Clinton was in office their was an economic surplus not a defecit...now with that logic you can borrow more because our economy was flourishing..it is Bush who within the last 8 years should have stepped in and regulated the amounts borrowed and how out of control the situation got....it took these huge companies folding for Bush to step in....not to mention the impact this war has had on our dollar and our economy...
Clinton is to blame? Why ? When he made these decison we were flourshing and it made sense to borrow bc the economy was doing well , when it took a turn (mostly as a result of the dollar lagging bc of poor decisons made by the current adminstration) it would have been the CURRENT adminstration's responsibility to change things based on what was CURRENTLY going on...to say its Clinton's fault bc of something that was enacted when our we had a surplus and were booming is really ridicilous,..Bush has been a sleep at the wheel for 8 yrs and its Clintons fault? LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Posted by Kimbalina
People tend to hear things from the 'news' and not look at the facts. It is true.. a lot of lines are blurred and it is easy to get lost in the BS
This is the author of the letter you are all commenting on. I wrote this because I am mad damn mad. Each and everyone one us work hard everyday, pay our bills, raise our children and we are lucky we can take a vacation or go to a movie once in a while. What our government has done and what they are proposing has put all of us in jeopordy. Our way of life and our childrens way of life. I am not going to stand by and be silent anymore. We pay these guys to represent us and now they need to perform and they need to know how we feel . I think all this commenting is great and I am learning alot from you all. I urge each of to write , email, call your representatives and senators anyone who will listen so that Washington doesn't forget that the decisions they make today will affect you and I tomorrow and for a long time to come.
Posted by jtgarsik
Posted by FutureMrs.T
I think we should bring Bill back.....![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
(sorry for being a perv - couldn't resist)
this may seem really stupid, but why not make those wall street execs pay? They are the ones making 50 million dollar bonuses every year. grrrr...
Posted by bluegreen08
When I took a class on real estate last year, my prof (who wrote our book) spent days telling us how dangerous these 0% mortgages and ballooning mortgages can be, and how there are going to be tons of foreclosures and how they are such a bad idea but people get ****** in.
I agree that people should know better, but if people keep telling you it's a good idea maybe you believe them because that's what you want to hear?
Posted by jenny8484
this may seem really stupid, but why not make those wall street execs pay? They are the ones making 50 million dollar bonuses every year. grrrr...
Posted by PegaLega
Posted by jtgarsik
i vote for amy
I seriously just threw up in my mouth a lil bit
Posted by Espo22
Posted by bluegreen08
When I took a class on real estate last year, my prof (who wrote our book) spent days telling us how dangerous these 0% mortgages and ballooning mortgages can be, and how there are going to be tons of foreclosures and how they are such a bad idea but people get ****** in.
I agree that people should know better, but if people keep telling you it's a good idea maybe you believe them because that's what you want to hear?
I spoke about this alot yesterday on the other thread about people believe what they were told. I understand how if you dream to have a home, you want to believe what you hear. The mortgage brokers are to blame too of course. But if a mortgage broker tells you that you can afford a home that is $3k a month lets say but you make $3k a month or $2500 a month then i dont see how someone can believe it. I grew up thinking that all these people lie, if i know youre going to make a profit off of me, i know youre going to tell me whatever i want to hear. You know they are looking out for themselves and they want to close a deal. After they are done with you then thats it they dont have to deal with you anymore. Some situations are different and maybe at first they were able to afford but then someone lost a job, although if you go sometime and not paying then maybe you should sell it, dont put yourself in the hole but ppl couldn't do that. I just cant imagine a broker telling me i can afford X amount a month if i know how much i make a month. I would sit there and think 'ok i make this much and if i take this place then thats basically most of what i make, how is that going to work'
Posted by lizzie217
From OP 'Why is the Press criticizing McCain for stepping up for the people and doing what we pay him to do which is to pass legislation to help us during this time?'
McCain is stepping in at this time to switch the focus of his campaign bc he is down in the polls...they do not need him there...both Republican and Democrats that are workig on the legistation have said they do not want him there bc he will be a distraction and they feel that he is bringing Presidential politics into this very critical and serious decison making process.
Obama is speaking with them everyday to stay informed.
A President should be able to multitask...there are often many things going on at once..he has a lot of nerve trying to push back the debate.what America needs most right now is to hear their two canidates speak about the ecomomy and the state of the country..the work horses are doing the deals in Washington Obama and McCain are the two heads who need to be communicating with us at this time!
Posted by JJC
Why do people think we need to be in constant growth in the economy? You can't have a period of great growth without some corrections. Ask any stock market expert...after a run up in the market, there has to be a correction.
The first 4 years of the Bush presidency had a pretty good economy. Also, look at the timeline and you'll see the dot com burst happened before Bush was elected. We give credit to Clinton for the dot com boom and blame bush for the burst of the bubble...not true...
I also find it funny how everyone wants to bail people out of the housing debacle, but no one asked the government for a bailout on the dot com bust...and it's the same thing. You have to let these economic conditions take their course and not reward poor decision making.
Now..heres the part most you wont like..buts its me stating my thoughts...so please respect that.
IMO Obama is a typical do nothing power broker. He ran for senate in Illinois basically un-opposed (a repeated theme for him). He promised change, but all the citizens of Illinois got was a man that planned his next gig. He is also linked to the most corrupt set of scandals in the nation not to mention the backing of the chicago mob (oh excuse me the democratic party). And look at the state of Illinois that he comes from. Highest in taxes (cook county and Chicago Highest in the nation). And most Corrupt (Last Governor in jail, and current Governor should be joining him soon). He hangs with antiSemite Louis Farakhan, William Ayers, the Mahajans and Nadmi Auchi, Ali Ata and numerous other controversial figures. One wonders whether Obama ever met and associated with normal people without their being felons, terroists or trouble makers.If Obama is elected be prepared to be taken over by illegal immigrants. Mexicans have their babies, Obama thinks it OK to kill ours.
In his years as state Senator and US Senator, what has Obama done to 'change' the way government is run? What has Obama done that has earned him this adulation, this acclaim? He is definitely going to change things, that's for sure. But do we want his radical change? The needs he discusses are real, but his plans are un workable and will never pass.
Posted by PegaLega
Posted by Espo22
I see that everybody is criticising the republicans, but do you see that it was Clinton who passed the bill that allowed people to buy homes with zero down.
And Democrats spend more than republicans, its just the way it is and the whole philosophy behind the parties. This is why they say democrats raise taxes. But a big part is that democrats believe in more government spending. Here are statistics.
When a Republican held the White House, spending fell by an average of 0.70% per year; with a Democrat in the White House, it grew by an average of 5.98%.
With Republican control of Congress, spending fell by an average of 2.12% per year; with Democrats in control, spending rose by an average of 4.82% annually.
With the GOP in control of both the White House and Congress, spending fell by an average of 6.85% per year. It is worth noting that this is a very small sample — just two years (fiscal years 1954–55). During the twelve years that the Democrats controlled Congress and the White House, spending rose by an average of 6.55% per year
THANK YOU DENISE!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
Usually I dont get involved in these bc I just dont...but CLINTON is the one who screwed this up-NOT BUSH! And that should and be known by all.
Posted by cherish83
Posted by PegaLega
Posted by Espo22
I see that everybody is criticising the republicans, but do you see that it was Clinton who passed the bill that allowed people to buy homes with zero down.
And Democrats spend more than republicans, its just the way it is and the whole philosophy behind the parties. This is why they say democrats raise taxes. But a big part is that democrats believe in more government spending. Here are statistics.
When a Republican held the White House, spending fell by an average of 0.70% per year; with a Democrat in the White House, it grew by an average of 5.98%.
With Republican control of Congress, spending fell by an average of 2.12% per year; with Democrats in control, spending rose by an average of 4.82% annually.
With the GOP in control of both the White House and Congress, spending fell by an average of 6.85% per year. It is worth noting that this is a very small sample — just two years (fiscal years 1954–55). During the twelve years that the Democrats controlled Congress and the White House, spending rose by an average of 6.55% per year
THANK YOU DENISE!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
Usually I dont get involved in these bc I just dont...but CLINTON is the one who screwed this up-NOT BUSH! And that should and be known by all.
I understand this all came from the bill that Clinton passed, and while i'm a democrat, I will criticize that. But I'm confused, these low income families were able to purchase homes, and what i gathered from some news program, is that they were 'tricked' into different interest rates and programs, and this is what has led these problems. Maybe I misunderstood the idea that the was being put across. But why would they not give these homeowners, knowing they are low income, a fixed interest rate, so they can possibly be resposible and understand their terms and what they would owe every month. I'm not to savvy on this. Can some one explain?![]()
did they take the post down????
Posted by Opera_Ghost
The whole things angers me too![]()
They actually had to lay off 10 or 12 people at my job yesterday for down sizing. Everyone was pretty shook up around here (still are a bit).
