Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Social Justice

  1. #11
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Cant you see the power that lobbyists for the oil, banking, and pharmaceutical industries have over average people. The system is out of balance i believe.
    Sure, like I said above, each party has their cause. What I didn't know about Bush was how much he did push for housing the poor. You'd think him a social utopian.

    The point was that the republicans said "hey, let's change this" and it was met with democratic resistance. It is safe to say that republican concerns were correct while Mr. Frank gets pie in his face. I hate to argue partisan politics, but my point was that everyone has an agenda (and you agree).

  2. #12
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Fannie and Freddie were part of the problem, not the whole problem. Unfortunately people like you use it as a neat little talking point over and over again while completely ignoring the multi dimensionality of the issue.
    Why was Bush making it a priority that everyone own houses?
    .

    Now that you've finally acknowledged this, I will drop this so called talking point. It was a big part of the disaster. In fact, I'd liken it as the Genisis. If you don't make $hitty loans, you can't securitize them and so on and so on.....

  3. #13
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong View Post
    Sure, like I said above, each party has their cause. What I didn't know about Bush was how much he did push for housing the poor. You'd think him a social utopian.

    The point was that the republicans said "hey, let's change this" and it was met with democratic resistance. It is safe to say that republican concerns were correct while Mr. Frank gets pie in his face. I hate to argue partisan politics, but my point was that everyone has an agenda (and you agree).
    My argument revolves around the point that Republicans and Mr. Bush especially were PUSHING housing as the most important element of an "ownership society". Who doesnt want to own a house? Not everyone should or can own a house! He made a house seem NECESSARY. The reforms Republicans pushed (weakly. remember it didnt come to committee unti 2005 and didnt ever get out of a Republican controlled committee)on Freddie and Fannie were more about politics (constituencies) and would not have in the least solved the pending housing bubble.

    The Republicans didnt want to change a LOT of things including what the mortgage companies were getting away with in pushing mortgages on people who had no ability to even pay their monthly bills. Why? Because thats where their money comes from. Very simple. They were going after Democratic constituencies in Frannie and Freddie. You make Republicans sound like saints. HARDLY the truth.
    Why are the Republicans fighting consumer protections when it comes to credit card companies? Hmmm i wonder.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 06-16-2010 at 09:44 AM.

  4. #14
    candleman is offline
    Mentor
    candleman's Avatar
    Joined: Jul 2009 Location: Outer Banks of North Carolina Posts: 1,511
    Quote Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong View Post
    Thanks for the feedback Candleman. I would love to hear Lloyd's opinon too.

    I think you and I are pretty much on the same page about the role of government and the role of the public. I don't mind paying taxes; I just think a lot of what we pay gets wasted, and that bothers me.

    There is one good government program I fully support. Here in Michigan, a soda or beer can or bottle is worth 10 cents. That was great legislation. Not only does it add to the common good of society, but it creates jobs (someone made those do it yourself return machines and someone tends to them).

    When I go down to your neck of the woods, it's a little disconcerting to simply throw all those beer cans away LOL.
    SL,
    Although this is not the right thread...... I think you've hit the nail on the head about a great government program that helps stem the waste of oil and plastic.

    I LOVE the states that charge a deposit on plastic, glass, and aluminum beverage containers. It helps in several ways. First of all, it discourages landfilling of these items that CAN be recycled. Secondly, it DOES create a lot of jobs. And I think it actually causes people to think twice about buying a bottle of something that they have to return. I see hundreds of people everyday walking around with plastic bottles full of water that they bought at the store. Most of those bottles end up in a landfill. What a waste of oil and our environment!

    Here on the Outer Banks, plastic shopping bags have been outlawed. We now use paper bags (again). It's much better for our enviroment here and the Sea Turtles, which is why it was imposed. But, paper bags have become cheaper than plastic bags, so it makes me a couple hundered extra bucks a year that way too.

    By the way, none of this would happen if it wasn't for government regulation. And, I think most states that have deposit laws and ban plastic bags are Democrat controlled governments. In North Carolina the Republicans don't have a very good environmental track record.

  5. #15
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    My argument revolves around the point that Republicans and Mr. Bush especially were PUSHING housing as the most important element of an "ownership society". Who doesnt want to own a house? Not everyone should or can own a house! He made a house seem NECESSARY. The reforms Republicans pushed (weakly. remember it didnt come to committee unti 2005 and didnt ever get out of a Republican controlled committee)on Freddie and Fannie were more about politics (constituencies) and would not have in the least solved the pending housing bubble.

    The Republicans didnt want to change a LOT of things including what the mortgage companies were getting away with in pushing mortgages on people who had no ability to even pay their monthly bills. Why? Because thats where their money comes from. Very simple. They were going after Democratic constituencies in Frannie and Freddie. You make Republicans sound like saints. HARDLY the truth.
    Why are the Republicans fighting consumer protections when it comes to credit card companies? Hmmm i wonder.
    Yes indeed, the republicans certainly appear to be saints if you read the links. Yes, they did push housing, but at the very core, recognized a big problem that was met with resistance from Mr. Barney Frank, a democrat. Again, I hate to argue partisan politics because you are very partisan, but when someone steps up and publically opposes change that, in retrospect, could have avoided near disaster, they are the problem.

    Parisan politcs aside, please recognize that the visible hand of our federal government was at the core of this melt down. Remember, I'm not negative on polictical parties, but the government as a whole. It's just another fine mess brought to you by the federal government lol. The same one you are so happy to support because your party occupies the White House. You are sooooo transparent lol.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •