Buying
Unvaluable
Shares
Hastily

G08ama!

Be Well

What is really at stake in this crisis is that the credibility of US Financial Institutions are suspect because they have cheated foriegn lenders until they wised up and stopped lending. This has triggered a crisis. As head of Goldman-Sachs, Paulson once led much of this fraud.

The crooks do not want to get sued and are using their positions of power with taxpayer money to bail themselves out without addressing the root causes: excess debt to wealth creation; a population burdened by high interest rates and no possible escape through bankruptcy; reductions in our ability to produce wealth is a result of flawed immigration, labor, manufacturing, regulatory and tax policies; reckless long and short derivative trading creating a $63 trillion black hole devoid of capital reserves of which "swaps" are a significant component.

Since the country can no longer pay its own way, it needs foriegn loans and investment. But those who have been screwed once aren't playing anymore. Paulson is trying to buy them back, but would you trust him? If not,the plan won't work.

But lets just keep lying ourselves into the poorhouse. All the major Candidates are doing it.

700 Billion divided by 1.4 million bad mortgages equals $500,000.00 per mortgage. Only our government can come up with figures like these. Of course there will be administrative fees and the cost of doing government business.

This bail-out is a gift, no strings attached, to the guys who created the problem.

Kinda like the arsonist who burns your house down returning and claiming the insurance money.

Will we ever wise up?

Personally, I don't understand why people would think about buying a house in an area where the values have gone up 50+% in the past year or two.

This bail-out is a gift, no strings attached, to the guys who created the problem....
Will we ever wise up?

#4 | Posted by johnjkavanagh

85%+ will still vote for one of the two guys who are backed by the arsonists.

A Nation of Sheep--remember that book?

I am convinced the problem will go on until we have a viable alternative to the Republicrat Party.

Or we have national bankruptcy, which is on its way.

"Or we have national bankruptcy, which is on its way."

Posted by johnjkavanagh

Notice the debt/GDP ratio is back where it was in the 50's, just like GM's stock.

I am convinced the problem will go on until we have a viable alternative to the Republicrat Party.

#7 | Posted by johnjkavanagh

The corporate media will never let that happen.

Neither will voters who would rather be on the winning side than on the right side necessarily.

700 Billion divided by 1.4 million bad mortgages equals $500,000.00 per mortgage. Only our government can come up with figures like these. Of course there will be administrative fees and the cost of doing government business.

#3 | Posted by KBM at 2008

wasnt it all the other bullshit they threw in to take advantage of us

just read about andy jackson and the grief he took when he vetoed the national bank and all........
and ever since its been a bad idea for the government to get in the way of our lives.....
its just too bad that we have to watch over people so closely or we SHOULD HAVE anyway

and dont EVEN TRY and talk shit...........HAGBARD>..........about republicans as if they were the only ones who have done this

CHRIS DODD and BARNEY FRANK SHOULS BE IN JAIL RIGHT NOW

Ron Paul has been correct on monetary issues.
Some will still call him a loon, or crazy, but he has been correct in his predictions.

"about republicans as if they were the only ones who have done this"

You mean the "deregulate everything in sight" Republicans? The "we oppose government bailouts" Republicans?

You mean THOSE Republicans?

or maybe the dems who all lined up behind clinton in 1999 to DEREGULATE THESE very institutions

also in that picture is joe biden

and IGNORING that is so typically dishonest from the left

and mccain two years ago tried to get frank and dodd to do something about mae and mac and they SAID THEY WERE ALL OKAY>

I HEARD THEM ON A FUCKIN VIDEO SAY IT themselves......

and the economy was doing at least okay TWO YEARS AGO BEFORE THE DEMS TOOK CONTROL.........

and just think of the SCREAMING if it had been the other way around........

WHAT EXPLAINATION!!!!! Fox News said that its the DEMOCRATS fault, you mean they lied, they are not telling the American the whole truth, I'm SHOCKED, I AM REALLY shocked!!!!!

The Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982.

"All in all, I think we hit the jackpot."
"Now, this bill also represents the first step in our administration's comprehensive program of financial deregulation."
-Ron Reagan, October 15, 1982

okay zat..........so this was law in 1982 and the law I cited was in 1999.......

so which one caused it all...........all of these people getting mortgages they had NO BUSINESS GETTING......and I know that isnt the ONLY reason for this meltdown but I have heard on CNN, so it has to be true and it is a major part of the credit part of it

WHICH PARTY kept on with the politically correct idea that you should get that Mortgage even IF you couldnt afford it and if you didnt give it to them you could be sued............WHICH PARTY WAS THAT?

and yes.......mortgage lenders who went after these people are also to blame

WHICH PARTY kept on with the politically correct idea that you should get that Mortgage even IF you couldnt afford it and if you didnt give it to them you could be sued............WHICH PARTY WAS THAT?

#16 | Posted by bushlovertwo at 2008-10-11 12:07 PM | Reply | Flag

I say it was the republicans. How'd I do? Got a LINK dUmmY?

;-)

I dont have a link. I have a memory something that leftists dont..........

so are you saying that I have to prove with a link that liberals have been all about PC???

surely you jest..........

The aparty of deregulation should be in jail right now

GRAMM-Leach-Bliley Act was the law that made all this possible. Passed first along strict party lines--no dem voted for it. After the dems got something for the little guy--it was passed with a veto proof majority. Clinton had no say--so he signed it to avoid a republican howling party.
Gramm still advises McCain on economics, and was McCains economics advisor till July when he called Americans whiners, and said we were in a mental recession

Another example of McCains poor judgement. Selecting the guy who got us into this mess as his economics advisor---too bad Boss Tweed was dead.

The republicans have been calling for deregulation since Reagan took office---they had all the power and got what they wanted. Now America is paying the price for listening to greedy idiots---and republicans are trying to shift the blame for their deregulation fiasco. Seems they just can't accept responsibility for their own actions.

How about that.

;-)

Plenty of mortgage companies and banks, RUN BY REPUBLICANS, gave out risky mortgages to people for the fee and comission income and no one forced those institutions to do it. They did it for money.
I spent 4 years in the mortgage business.

Second, many mortgages OK in the beginning reset to where people could not pay. These were white, middle class people. Often Republicans.

Third, the Dems and poor people did not package these flaky mortgages up, call them AAA+ securities and resell them. The Republicans on Wall Street did.

FOurth, Democrats and poor people did not invent exotic derivatives with no value and sell them all over the world. Guess who did, in an unregulated environment they had designed for their own enrichment? Wall Street and Republicans.

I think it has been a remarkable ploy to try to blame this mess on Democrats and poor people exclusively when it has been 90-95% the fault of Reepublicans and their financial institutions.

so are you saying that I have to prove with a link that liberals have been all about PC???

surely you jest..........

#18 | Posted by bushlovertwo at 2008-10-11 12:17 PM | Reply

I'm not jesting at all. Either link up, or admit you are talking out of your anus. Show where ANY party forced any institution to give loans to unqualified applicants. Show me that law that says institutions must give loans to anyone who walks in the door. That's your claim.

Back it up.

Simple isn't it.

;-)

Im not talking out of my anus.........that must be YOU that you are smelling.

ba dump dump...................ah I got a million of em...............

to even try and tell us that the right has been about PC is one of the silliest things you have ever said.........and bro......thats saying something

but nonetheless

have a great day

its time for ou/texas.........

and the economy was doing at least okay TWO YEARS AGO BEFORE THE DEMS TOOK CONTROL... -- #13 | Posted by bushlovertwo

Padding corporate assets with derivatives was a long-term project -- remember, this is what sent LTCM under in the late 1990's.

I fully agree that the Dems share responsibility. They can whine all they want about being in the minority from 2000-2006, but they could still write legislation and make enough noise to make it costly for the Repubs to shoot it down. If they had made any attempt to craft the appropriate regulatory framework, they could have tacked it on to the bailout bill and dared Bush to veto it.

...the Dems and poor people did not package these flaky mortgages up, call them AAA+ securities and resell them. The Republicans on Wall Street did.

FOurth, Democrats and poor people did not invent exotic derivatives...

I think it has been a remarkable ploy to try to blame this mess on Democrats and poor people exclusively...

#20 | Posted by johnjkavanagh

Well said.

This article's focus on mortgage defaults is misplaced. Everyone at even relatively low levels of banking finance knows how to safely handle risky assets.

There's a good explanation of the problem with the way these mortgages were securitized in the "Mortgage Science Projects" section of this series (good recommendation, Corky):

Just shows that both parties are to blame. The dems for forcing the bad mortgages. The repubs for not regulating the selling (insuring) of those mortage securities.

Both issues will need to be addressed if we are to stop this from happening again.

Repeating that I have been in the mortgage business...

I know of NO situation where any institution or mortgage company EVER gave a mortgage to someone who was unqualified or did not meet the guidelines or had no money.

I said NO to plenty of people. Most of them were white.

I don't know where this urban myth of "lots-of-poor-black-people-
got-mortgages-they-didn't-
deserve" came from. I know it to be untrue.

Some did, no doubt. That was not the cause of the current crisis.

That said, the Dems deserve part of the blame for not watching the store and letting the mess evolve into a crisis. The Reps deserve the rest of the blame. Which they refuse to take.

At the HEART of the mortgage meltdown is Barney Fag, the democrat party and "The Community Reinvestment Act". No matter how much you give THOSE PEOPLE they remain completely fucked up. We need a stake through the HEART.

Amazing, one congressman time-traveled back to 1982 and influenced Reagan.

At the HEART of the mortgage meltdown is Barney Fag, the democrat party and "The Community Reinvestment Act". --FWThom, #27

His last name is Frank.

The CRA is irrelevant.

Barney Frank made Wall St. loose all their sense and sell worthless Credit Swaps they didn't understand to get big fees.

I see.

Reminds me of Medieval peasants on a bloodthirsty hunt for witches because their children are sick with the plague.

That said, the Dems deserve part of the blame for not watching the store and letting the mess evolve into a crisis. The Reps deserve the rest of the blame. Which they refuse to take. -- #26 | Posted by johnjkavanagh

I wonder if there's a way to enact some sort of reform of the way congressional committee assignments are made. Part of the problem is that people like Frank (Chair of the House Banking Committee) and Dodd (Chair of the Senate Banking Committee) represent a district and state, respectively, with substantial constituencies in the financial sector. Like the committee chairs from the midwest who typically head Agriculture (e.g., Bob Dole in Kansas, for many years) they use the committees to serve their districts in ways that aren't necessarily good for the country as a whole.

Certainly Frank and Dodd played a role in all this. Were they the single contributing factor? Of course not. Both parties are looking to shift blame.

It reminds me of something I tried to teach my children... The measure of a person is not whether they make mistakes or not. Everyone makes mistakes. Your character is revealed in how you respond to your mistakes. Do you assume responsibility and try to learn from your mistakes or do you try to shift blame?

So far I have not seen a lot of character on either side.

It would be so refreshing for McCain or Obama to stand up Thursday and say, You know what, there is blame on both sides of this issue. But, I promise you that if you elect me president I will use all the powers I have under the constitution to find out why this happened and make sure that the ones responsible are brought to light and held accountable.

Certainly Frank and Dodd played a role in all this. Were they the single contributing factor? Of course not. -- Sawdust #32

Oh, yeah, absolutely not -- thanks for pointing this out. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

They weren't the cause at all. They should have been sounding alarm bells and addressing the problem, though, and they didn't. My only point was that there's an institutional bias toward negligence -- the people doing the oversight represent constituencies that don't want regulation.

Isn't what Frank and Dodd did a little bit like what Palin is being accused of? (This *may* be somewhat of a stretch, but... )

She looked the other way while her husband did things that got this guy in trouble. She was found to be unethical in that she did not stop what was going on and allowed it to continue.

Frank and Dodd did the same thing, they saw this going on and looked the other way.

Ha, that should get some of the partisans howling...

Phoenix, I agree, the Repubs looked the other way as well. I believe they are all to blame.

I think if we had an option Nov 4 that was something like "Check here if you want *all* of them out of office". It would pass in a big way.

Here is Bush's own presidential action memo demanding the lending institutions get rid of downpayments, of pushing interest rates of zero percent, of discarding bad credit ratings, etc. all to give subprime loans to minorities and others who had bad credit risks who never should have been given the loans in the first place.

Sure lawsuits charging redlining were threatened by Dems and their radical special interest groups like ACORN and La Raza against banks who hestitated in giving out these loans but it wasn't until deregulation under Bush wiped away any obstacles to prevent subprimes from exploding.

btw -- Did you know that illegal aliens who were given a good portion these subprime loans were also given HUD "Section 8" housing money which paid 70% of their mortgage payments and got Section 8 housing money with our tax money???? The corruption knows no bounds.

BUSH OPENED THE DOORS AND GAVE CARTE BLANCH TO THE SUBPRIME DISASTER with the following document:

"The corruption knows no bounds."

You got that right, my friend.

Barney Franks must resign. In 2004 he said there was no problem and lied to the President and the country. He blocked a lot of legislation designed to prevent this and there is video tape to prove it.

This was government approved predatory lending and it began to really ramp up in 1991. Relaxed underwriting guidelines and banks maxing out their margins as a result of the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 are the 2 main ingredients.

Fannie and Freddie knew the default rate for these loans were 5 times higher than the norm. They boxed them up and sold them anyway. Who told them to compete with sub prime lending?

It is all about the margins. $1.00 backing up $100 in loans. So if $3.00 defaults, your done. It's basic math.

Libs wish they could pin this on Palin.

Franks did make Wall St. firms leverage themselves 30:1, a ratio no sensible business would have.

They did it themselves, driven by greed.

I want to see heads roll.

Not just lukewarm investigations that end up nowhere.

I want Republican heads to roll.
I want Democrat heads to roll.
I want formerly untouchable CEO heads to roll.

No excuses.
Get out the bipartisan guillotines.

I want perp-walks -- and not just for a couple of mid-level management guys for show.
I want serious jail time for those at the top -- NOW.

"(Barney Frank) blocked a lot of legislation designed to prevent this and there is video tape to prove it."

Frank was a minority member on a committee chaired and populated by Republicans. Had all the Republicans agreed, Frank's opinion would have been worthless.

Acorn/Obama Sued Citigroup To Give The Loans That Caused This Mess.

Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans under the Community Reinvestment Act which was a factor in causing the economic crisis (see HERE an More..d HERE ) well look at what some fellow bloggers have dug up while researching Obama's legal career. Looks like a typical ACORN lawsuit to get banks to hand out bad loans.

In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the bank's reputation back?

It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed tons of these lawsuits and ALL of them allege racism.

Case Name
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
State/Territory Illinois
Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs' suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank's loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.
Plaintiff's Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Clayton, Fay (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)
FH-IL-0011-9000
Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-9000

AMID A GLOBAL financial crisis that began with unsustainable loans to people with bad credit, it was only a matter of time before apologists for Wall Street excesses would try to pin the blame on the poor - and on government policies meant to help them.

Sure enough, the Community Reinvestment Act has emerged in recent weeks as a favorite target of conservatives and others who oppose any government intervention in the market, for it requires banks to lend in neighborhoods they might otherwise avoid.

And yet the Community Reinvestment Act has nothing whatsoever to do with the subprime mess.

The law applies specifically to commercial banks, which in recent months have been the least volatile part of the financial-services industry. The measure was passed in 1977 to combat redlining, the practice of banks refusing to write mortgages in poor neighborhoods - even when they were taking deposits from residents of those neighborhoods.

To meet Community Reinvestment Act requirements, banks do make loans to low-income homebuyers - often in concert with community groups that provide financial advice and other crucial training. While banks at first had to be "dragged into participating," said Tom Callahan, executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, loans made under the auspices of the reinvestment law have performed remarkably well. One key initiative of this sort, the state's SoftSecond mortgage program, has a delinquency rate of 1.8 percent - compared with about 5 percent for all mortgages in Massachusetts.

The subprime mortgages that have failed left and right are the antithesis of the carefully designed, well-supervised loans provided by tightly regulated banks. No law forced a mob of unregulated lenders to make loans in poor neighborhoods. Rather, mortgage companies and Wall Street financiers saw a business opportunity in subprime lending, where the risk of default was high but so were the interest rates.

Never mind that subprime mortgages were once considered as disreputable a business as check-cashing stores and payday loans; big-time investors took a keen interest once the potential rewards became clear. When financial firms began buying up and bundling mortgages, redividing them into securities, and selling them off, individual brokers had no incentive to make sure any given mortgage would be sustainable if housing prices fell.

Far from being forced to write new loans, brokers competed to sell home mortgages to lower-income customers. Nadine Cohen, a senior attorney in the consumer unit of Greater Boston Legal Services, has a client who had been living in public housing in Cambridge for $350 a month - before getting a $500,000 home loan.

In that case, as in so many of today's mortgage horror stories, the lender wasn't a traditional bank. According to Callahan, 98.4 percent of the subprime mortgages in Massachusetts in 2006 were made by lenders whose operations in the state are not subject to the Community Reinvestment Act.

To be sure, the act isn't the only vehicle by which government officials have sought to influence lending behavior. President Clinton and his Housing and Urban Development secretary, Henry Cisneros, did seek to raise homeownership rates among low-income and minority buyers. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-chartered mortgage wholesalers whose practices were closely watched within the lending industry, did face political pressure to ease their lending standards.

But those were hardly the only factors behind lax lending standards. There was enormous pressure within the marketplace. As The New York Times recently reported, Fannie Mae was losing business because of competition from Wall Street and elsewhere, and mortgage lenders and Fannie Mae's own shareholders were pushing the firm to dive deep into the subprime loan business.

The subsequent meltdown of the nation's entire financial system could not have happened without a huge - and entirely voluntary - inflow of money from Wall Street into a sketchy sector of the mortgage market. Nobody forced investment firms to wager billions of dollars directly on these loans, or to build an elaborate web of complex financial transactions dependent upon their continued performance. But they did.

The recent animosity over the Community Reinvestment Act, in short, simply can't be explained by the facts. Among the law's critics, there's more than a whiff of social Darwinism - the certainty that only a government policy aimed at helping losers could lead the whiz kids of Wall Street so far astray. Hogwash. The current financial crisis grows out of loose regulation that gave big investors plenty of freedom to make foolish bets, and then force their losses upon the taxpayers.

Here is Bush's own presidential action memo demanding the lending institutions get rid of downpayments, of pushing interest rates of zero percent, of discarding bad credit ratings, etc.

I read the article you referenced and it doesn't support your contentions i.e.

demanding the lending institutions get rid of downpayments
Downpayments were not eliminated. More specifically the article stated: The President has proposed $200 million annually for the American Dream Downpayment Fund to help roughly 40,000 families a year with their down payment and closing costs. Down payments were still required but the government was offering poor people assistance. It sounds like the banks still got their money.

pushing interest rates of zero percent
I didn't see any reference to pushing interest rates of zero percent as one of the president's initiatives. Assuming that there were zero percent interest rates, it was probably's the industry's response to the president's appeal to increase home ownership among minorities. Note: since the mortgage company was going to resell the mortgage, they really didn't care what interest rate was being offered.

discarding bad credit ratings
I found no reference to discarding bad credit ratings. However, there a reference to weak credit histories that described why home ownership among minorities was low. At no point in the article was there a reference to ignoring a person's credit history.

The more you and others try to pin this on poor minorities, the more you guys fall short. Not one piece of evidence that has been referenced states that loans should be given to the unqualified. Mortgage companies invented exotic mortgages such as no doc, interest only, etc. because they 1) wanted to comply with the president's wishes 2) figured out how they could make money by doing so i.e. securitize them and sell them off to unsuspecting investors!

What this country needs right now are for the everyday Joe to stop worrying about their own lives and start worrying more about the futures of their offspring. Young people need to stop being irresponsible with their finances, not go for the quick fixes, not shop at the malls once a week, not be lazy, not be caring, not to disregard religion, not disregard the importance of education, not watch episodes of "The Hills" and "My sweet sixteen, or "Bridezilla" since these shows distort reality and basically lower their IQ's. There are plenty more that need to be added, but I could go on and on. Peer pressure, irresponsible parents and a me-first attitude have ruined the character of our country and individuality. We're hostages to product placement, advertising and "keeping up with the Joneses" mentality. I blame all forms of media and the moneychangers for creating our lust for wanting more than we need. It's been proven that having a vacation home in the Hamptons or the Shore, having a boat or a waverunner, having a Mercedes Benz or BMW, having a Viking stove or just about anything money can buy will not secure happiness or peace of mind. Im not against the human will to succeed or be creative, but we have become a nation of slaves to our own addictions. We've have degenerated as a race. No candidate today or politican will save us because they are guilty to the same weaknesses that we all have. There is no leadership. Money is definitely the root of all evil. We do not need a lot to find success professionally, emotionally or socially. If anything I say sounds like the rantings of a madman, then you have no idea who you are and you are souless. If you somewhat agree with what I say, then speak up to those you love. Im not a church goer, but live by my catholic upbringing and that's what gives me faith. Don't succumb to vices and believe me there are those in the media, print or electronic, the Neocons (Kristol, Wolfowitz, Pearle etc etc) and subversive forces in politics that are looking to corrupt your character and essentially kill your spirit.

Go Rays.

Affirmative Action, EEO, and The Community Reinvestment Act all becames quotas. Dems know it and they don't care if it brings the country down as long as they don't have to live next to THOSE PEOPLE. Dems want their votes but think that THOSE PEOPLE are stupid, helpless, and are always in need of dem hand-outs. GIVE THE MF'S MORE LIBS, GIVE THEM MORE.

If you do not pay income taxes, then you should not be allowed to vote... Show a tax form and you can register to vote.

"If you do not pay income taxes, then you should not be allowed to vote..."

What about all the other taxes? Will those folks then be exempt from sales taxes, gasoline taxes, utility taxes, excise taxes, property taxes and payroll taxes?

Or do you just want their money, but not their opinion?

If you do not pay income taxes, then you should not be allowed to vote... Show a tax form and you can register to vote.

Do you mean people who don't file tax returns or specifically are you referring to people who don't pay federal income tax?

Affirmative Action, EEO, and The Community Reinvestment Act all becames quotas

Why do you condemn the program and the people it was intended to benefit and not the administrators that recast the program to fit their needs.

As originally conceived, AA had nothing to do with quotas. It was an recognition by LBJ that America was not a pure meritocracy and something had to be done to accomodate for qualified minorities being overlooked for jobs and business opportunities simply because they were not White. Surely you can agree with the original intent of the program?

Go Rays.

#47 | Posted by LeeAtwater at 2008-10-11 03:25 PM

LeeAtwater- I guess you didn't watch last night's game. And Lee, just to let you know, there's a game on tonight as well. Good chance you didn't know.

The number I hear is 35% do not pay any federal income taxes at all. Yet these people are happy to vote in politicians who promise to tax the rest of us and give it to them.

Yea, I guess I would say, those who do not pay income tax should not vote. Let those of us who pay into the system determine how the taxes are spent.

SAW,

the real number is 50% do not pay.

"many of them really don't understand the mortgage meltdown or the broader financial meltdown"

These are the same retards who signed mortgage papers and their only question was .....

"What's next month's rent?"

so are you saying that I have to prove with a link that liberals have been all about PC???

#18 | Posted by bushlovertwo at 2008-10-11 12:17 PM | Reply

Get reality.

You somehow got suckered into an arguement with Boob.

This is the clown who believes Elvis is behind 9/11 -- because he saw it online.

If you can't link it, it does not exist

G08ama!

#1 | Posted by skip_wellington at 2008-10-11 09:49 AM | Reply

Huh? Are you saying that Osama fucks Goats? Goat-Bama?

the real number is 50% do not pay.

What the real number is, the fact that so many people are not paying income taxes is a real indictment of our economy: that so many don't earn enough to pay income taxes. I would prefer an economic system that everyone paid, even if it was a dime. An economy that is so skewed that so many people don't pay indicates that wealth has been concentrated in to few hands.

It is the same with our businesses. Manufacturing is waning and financial services is (was) increasing. With so much of our economy dependent on financial services and now that industry is in the toilet, what's left? Our economy is becoming very fragile.

Personally, I don't understand why people would think about buying a house in an area where the values have gone up 50+% in the past year or two.

This is the most accurate comment on this blog and I noticed no one has commented on it. The whole problem is that buyers were idiots and then try to claim ignorance. The housing "crisis" will correct itself.

Everyone needs to vote the imcumbents out of office. I do not care what political party they belong to. Do this for the next few elections and the polititians will get the message.

Everyone should pay taxes. Get rid of the 70 year old income tax system and move to a consumption tax. Even the hookers, drug dealers and tourists from other countries will pay federal taxes.