Obama plans to raise taxes both personal and corp?

[MMI Enterprises 289]

Election thread closed down due to fighting and off topic discussion.

In case any want to contunue the discussion here is some the last speak presented:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double07

When taxes are increased on the "Big Guys" who actually pays? Take a minute and go look in the mirror. Hello! Increase tax on corporations and they just smile and tack it right on our butts. Kind of like the minimum wage being increased all the stupid time. It's not a living wage and can never be one unless you buckle to full blown socialism!! Same people on minimum wage will be screaming about their hamburger or box of chicken costing them 15 bucks. Who pays for that...Go look in the mirror again! It's that simple.

One post you say the Big Guy pays and then the next post you say the average American will pay....NEWS FLASH...we pay no matter what

Another NEWS FLASH who's paying for all the corp greed and poor management now, $700,000,000,000 bail out the other Billions of dollars already given away already to big corps. We are bailing them all out Joe Six Pack

When is enough, enough, we in the past years under Republican prez all the way back to Reagan up to Bush have given big corps, tax breaks, corp welfare, loop holes, less or no regulations and what has it got us? A lot of pain, bailouts, companies going overseas, less benefits, more corp greed, poor management, lay offs we give corp welfare they still go overseas, stagnant or lower wages, the list goes on and on. We have given them and given to them, they have taken & taken more and more and all we get is the shaft and now we get to bailout all kinds of corps. What more should we give them before we say ENOUGH is ENOUGH

Clamp down on corps, regulate them, tell them if they go overseas they get no tax breaks, better yet tell them if they go they can't sell anything in the USA at all. What you think they will all go, NO. Instead of making $10,000,000,000 of us they only make $9,000,000,000. Poor them I feel sooooo bad for them, I hope they don't go bankrupt, ah that wont happen, we'll just bail them out

I am not against corps, but it has gotten out of hand and this economy and bailout proves that. We are going to PAY & PAY we just got a big tax its called bailout & the deficit. I don't know why you worry so much about big corps when YOU are paying for their mistakes now after they have made huge profits and CEO's have made millions every year. How much of this bailout & deficit are you and your children going to pay 10's of thousands of dollars is your part. Let them pay their part finally

I'm not worried about taxing them a little more, they will find a loop hole and work it out and still charge us. Its all part of business and the game they play

Go Barak Hussien Obama... Lets be for the American people Joe Six Pack and have big corps pay for their own bailout

Jeff that smells of entitlement. All your saying is you want want want with no recognition whatsoever that we the American people own and are the corps. Fine, you can change the regs for corps to keep them more at home and so they don't fail as they been doing but why double tax yourself both personal and corp?

[Beth n Rod 1,279]

How Much Would You Pay in Taxes? | PARADE Magazine

No. Read this.

Beth

[Jeff 232]

Election thread closed down due to fighting and off topic discussion.

In case any want to contunue the discussion here is some the last speak presented:

Jeff that smells of entitlement. All your saying is you want want want with no recognition whatsoever that we the American people own and are the corps. Fine, you can change the regs for corps to keep them more at home and so they don't fail as they been doing but why double tax yourself both personal and corp?

I've changed my mind. The republicans got it right. Its the Dems that screw everything up and tax us all.

VOTE McCain he's the man. Vote Palin, instead of the Dems screwing us maybe Palin can blow all us Joe Six Packs:lglolly::lgbounces:lildevil:! Go Palin in 2008

I'm turning over a new leaf. I am going straight republican line

[Guest Trey N Rog]

I think all corps should be government controlled. They are all greedy and should not be allowed to keep any money. All of their money should be confiscated by the government and handed out to the people that need it.

[Beth n Rod 1,279]

I've changed my mind. The republicans got it right. Its the Dems that screw everything up and tax us all.

VOTE McCain he's the man. Vote Palin, instead of the Dems screwing us maybe Palin can blow all us Joe Six Packs:lglolly::lgbounces:lildevil:! Go Palin in 2008

I'm turning over a new leaf. I am going straight republican line

Yeah...right...that's funny! :lol:

Beth

[Guest Trey N Rog]

How Much Would You Pay in Taxes? | PARADE Magazine

No. Read this.

Beth

Good read. I like Parade Magazine and information from the tax policy center. They are both known to be fair and balanced and only present the facts as they are, no twists or curves.

[FCPWLLC 233]

I think all corps should be government controlled. They are all greedy and should not be allowed to keep any money. All of their money should be confiscated by the government and handed out to the people that need it.

Probably the most uneducated thing I have read this Month. Sit on the couch and DON'T PRODUCE while I go out and PRODUCE so that I can then turn and give it to you.

[Scott Stone 604]

Civics lesson 101. The president is not the person that sets the tax rates. Congress does.

Civic Lesson 102, The president does not define spending. Congress does.

In reality, the president only ratifies any measures that Congress proposes. If he wants to get legislation proposed in congress, he needs to find a sympathetic congressman. Of course, that usually comes with a cost.

I cannot think of a single president in recent history that has even accomplished one half of what he proposed to get elected. That means, the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and if we want to even try and have a semblance of success in accomplishing something, it needs to be a president that has experience in talking to both sides of the aisle in congress. Obama is very much a party line type of guy, though, in reality, his congressional experience is about as minimal as it could get, and still run for president as a congressman, or senator. McCain at least has a record of working both sides of the street.

Personally, I don't like either one, and do not even think that McCain was the best choice from the Arizona congressional delegation. But the guy I would have preferred run said no way.

BTW, I do not understand how in the world Obama, or McCain, can do all that they are proposing without raising taxes astronomically, on everyone. I also do not understand how in the world they can even think of raising any taxes with the economy in the current state.

Edited October 13, 2008 by Scott Stone

[Jeff 232]

Civics lesson 101. The president is not the person that sets the tax rates. Congress does.

Civic Lesson 102, The president does not define spending. Congress does.

In reality, the president only ratifies any measures that Congress proposes. If he wants to get legislation proposed in congress, he needs to find a sympathetic congressman. Of course, that usually comes with a cost.

I cannot think of a single president in recent history that has even accomplished one half of what he proposed to get elected. That means, the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and if we want to even try and have a semblance of success in accomplishing something, it needs to be a president that has experience in talking to both sides of the aisle in congress. Obama is very much a party line type of guy, though, in reality, his congressional experience is about as minimal as it could get, and still run for president as a congressman, or senator. McCain at least has a record of working both sides of the street.

Personally, I don't like either one, and do not even think that McCain was the best choice from the Arizona congressional delegation. But the guy I would have preferred run said no way.

BTW, I do not understand how in the world Obama, or McCain, can do all that they are proposing without raising taxes astronomically, on everyone. I also do not understand how in the world they can even think of raising any taxes with the economy in the current state.

I'm pretty sue no president has ever done a 1/4 of what they say during campaigning.

I have always said pick one or two things and go for that. Work hard at it and get it done. No way dozens of things. Fix Education, health care, spending, taxes, IRS, SS, Economy, defense etc etc pick a few and make them work. They would be known for actually accomplishing something instead of proposing a lot and getting very little actually done

Edited October 13, 2008 by Jeff

[Scott Stone 604]

I was being generous. I am that kind of person...

[Scott Stone 604]

one more thing, crticizing Obamas plan for tax reduction, which I have already pointed out he has zero authority to do. Currently 40% of income earners pay no federal taxes at all. That means that every one of those people get 100% or more of the withholding. You might ask, "How do they get more than their withholding back?" That is easy, it is taken from those in the 60% that pay taxes and is given to them. That means that those high income earners are not just paying taxes to pay for stupid things like federal highways, welfare, and security, but it also pays to supplement the incomes of those that cannot or will not, provide for themselves. I had the most eye opening experience recently. 3 got an email from someone tha was "desperate" for work. I was willing to give them a job. I was even willing to start them at a wage that was twice the amount that they had ever made previously. But by the time they set the parameters that they wanted for their full time job, it turned out that they could only work 6 hours a day, between 8:30 and 2:30 monday to friday. It just amazed me that someone that seemed so desperate was so picky about the hours they could work.

[Double07 14]

Election thread closed down due to fighting and off topic discussion.

In case any want to contunue the discussion here is some the last speak presented:

Good! Thread locked and McCain wins!!! Thread didn't turn into messiah gold obamanation:lgtear:.

[MMI Enterprises 289]

Scott people base their pick on what the candidates say they plan to do perhaps as much as they suspect they will be able to do. Wouldn't be very smart to vote for someone that pretty much promises to be be working on this or that when you would rather have them working on something else..so I really don't get your first point of your last post other than maybe your just trying to minimize folks fears of an even worse bias against those that pay tax.

Perhaps a good point on the 'more than 100%' that you bring up is that the portion above 100% would be from the earned income credit and is seperate figure in itself enough so that things still show as taxes being paid. Is a sliding scale with the mid point of the qualification range crediting more. Where the candidates are on EIC and how it woud effect savings/amounts paid on the info link Beth provided may be in question.

Have seen similar example of people wanting work but not being able to be flexible enough to suit. Such schedule usually reflects having to care for children.

[MMI Enterprises 289]

What we got now Obama calling for a 3 mon. hold on foreclosure procedures? how smart is that? Surely there is small biz involved in making money off all that goes with foreclosing and remarketing a house. There goes the free market/low market that relies on letting the chips fall where they may. Yup just let those that aren't paying stay that much longer in ripping off the banks. Look at it this way..nothing in way of some magical income gain is going to befall those folks that are facing their mortgage balloons or interest rate hikes.It's not like all those specialty loans have them just on the edge of being able to afford them. They way out their league. One problem with the call for a hold is that it doesn't recognize your standard everyday foreclosures. Everwhere has a certain avg percentage figure for foreclosures per month.

So also, what are all these programs Obama is planning to do away with?

[Russell Cissell 65]

545 PEOPLE

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes .

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it 's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in , it's because they want them in .

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way .

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation,' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses

provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

--taken from unknown source

[Double07 14]

Civics lesson 101. The president is not the person that sets the tax rates. Congress does.

Civic Lesson 102, The president does not define spending. Congress does.

In reality, the president only ratifies any measures that Congress proposes. If he wants to get legislation proposed in congress, he needs to find a sympathetic congressman. Of course, that usually comes with a cost.

I cannot think of a single president in recent history that has even accomplished one half of what he proposed to get elected. That means, the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and if we want to even try and have a semblance of success in accomplishing something, it needs to be a president that has experience in talking to both sides of the aisle in congress. Obama is very much a party line type of guy, though, in reality, his congressional experience is about as minimal as it could get, and still run for president as a congressman, or senator. McCain at least has a record of working both sides of the street.

Personally, I don't like either one, and do not even think that McCain was the best choice from the Arizona congressional delegation. But the guy I would have preferred run said no way.

BTW, I do not understand how in the world Obama, or McCain, can do all that they are proposing without raising taxes astronomically, on everyone. I also do not understand how in the world they can even think of raising any taxes with the economy in the current state.

Scott I didn't get anything out of this post. Maybe if you would develop typing tourettes syndrome and "Bah! I hate BUSH!!" put something in "It's BUSH'S fault!!" there that was "BUSH CHENEY suck!!" a little more "BUSH did it!!" palatable I would be able to "My pants are on fire!!BUSH'S FAULT!!" comprehend.

:lgbonk:

[Jeff 232]

What we got now Obama calling for a 3 mon. hold on foreclosure procedures? how smart is that? Surely there is small biz involved in making money off all that goes with foreclosing and remarketing a house. There goes the free market/low market that relies on letting the chips fall where they may. Yup just let those that aren't paying stay that much longer in ripping off the banks. Look at it this way..nothing in way of some magical income gain is going to befall those folks that are facing their mortgage balloons or interest rate hikes.It's not like all those specialty loans have them just on the edge of being able to afford them. They way out their league. One problem with the call for a hold is that it doesn't recognize your standard everyday foreclosures. Everwhere has a certain avg percentage figure for foreclosures per month.

So also, what are all these programs Obama is planning to do away with?

There goes free market, :lgbugeyesDUH, free market went out the fricking door one of the 1st bailouts Bush & Paulson did and now every other bailout they are doing. McCain wants to bailout everyone. So by the way you say it its OK to throw free market out the door as long as we are bailing out banks, investment companies, insurance companies all big biz or corporations to the tune of over a trillion dollars+? That OK in your eyes obviously? Right?:lgbow::lgbonk:

But bailout a single home owner and THERE GOES FREE MARKET, you are so funny:banghead:

So its alright if Bush & Paulson bailout the very businesses that caused this whole economic crisis? But if Obama puts a hold on a foreclosure for a few months...Not even a bailout, its the end of the world & free market in your eyes because why? Oh thats right because Obama did it not GW. I really thought you were smarter to see through the partisanship BS

I don't like any of it, there is no more free market as we knew it. I don't like bailing out homeowners that made bad moves and sure in hell hate that we will spend over 2 trillion + bailing out big biz. I guess thats the problem liberal Jeff thinks none of this bailout crap should be going on no matter who proposes it, you just dont like bailing out when Obama proposes it:applause::lolsign:. HELLL Obama isnt even saying bail them out, he's saying put the foreclosure on hold

Please Kev explain why its OK for Bush & everyone else to bailout these banks , insurance companies etc etc but put a hold on foreclosures to JOE SIX PACKits not OK, Please define and defend this in your right wing ways. can't wait to hear this bulls**t

What is it you just don't like JOE SIX PACK average American?:lgwave:

Total joke:lglolly:

[Double07 14]

There goes free market, :lgbugeyesDUH, free market went out the fricking door one of the 1st bailouts Bush & Paulson did and now every other bailout they are doing. McCain wants to bailout everyone. So by the way you say it its OK to throw free market out the door as long as we are bailing out banks, investment companies, insurance companies all big biz or corporations to the tune of over a trillion dollars+? That OK in your eyes obviously? Right?:lgbow::lgbonk:

But bailout a single home owner and THERE GOES FREE MARKET, you are so funny:banghead:

So its alright if Bush & Paulson bailout the very businesses that caused this whole economic crisis? But if Obama puts a hold on a foreclosure for a few months...Not even a bailout, its the end of the world & free market in your eyes because why? Oh thats right because Obama did it not GW. I really thought you were smarter to see through the partisanship BS

I don't like any of it, there is no more free market as we knew it. I don't like bailing out homeowners that made bad moves and sure in hell hate that we will spend over 2 trillion + bailing out big biz. I guess thats the problem liberal Jeff thinks none of this bailout crap should be going on no matter who proposes it, you just dont like bailing out when Obama proposes it:applause::lolsign:. HELLL Obama isnt even saying bail them out, he's saying put the foreclosure on hold

Please Kev explain why its OK for Bush & everyone else to bailout these banks , insurance companies etc etc but put a hold on foreclosures to JOE SIX PACKits not OK, Please define and defend this in your right wing ways. can't wait to hear this bulls**t

What is it you just don't like JOE SIX PACK average American?:lgwave:

Total joke:lglolly:

Jeff I wonder what caused the problem? Hmmmm. I can't see where Bush created Fannie and Freddie. Hmmmmm...could it have been DEMOCRATS??? Yeap. That would be your party that thought it would be a good idea for banks to lend to people who could not pay for their houses. It is fundamental for the Democrat party to survive. Keep everyone under the thumb of government so they have to come to the government for everything. Government-The new Wal-Mart except it's all free to those who don't deserve it! That's a great idea! Why don't we just all bury our money and jump on the welfare wagon. Wouldn't that be great!!

[Jeff 232]

Jeff I wonder what caused the problem? Hmmmm. I can't see where Bush created Fannie and Freddie. Hmmmmm...could it have been DEMOCRATS??? Yeap. That would be your party that thought it would be a good idea for banks to lend to people who could not pay for their houses. It is fundamental for the Democrat party to survive. Keep everyone under the thumb of government so they have to come to the government for everything. Government-The new Wal-Mart except it's all free to those who don't deserve it! That's a great idea! Why don't we just all bury our money and jump on the welfare wagon. Wouldn't that be great!!

Man don't you understand, its not just Fannie & Freddie mac, its WORLD WIDE all kinds of big biz is being bailed out. NOT just Freddie & Fannie. It was made easier and suggested to give loans to lower income people that yes shouldn't have gotten the loans. BUT the banks DID NOT HAVE to give those loans, they weren't told they had to. There are MANY MANY banks that did not give loans to lower income, these banks that did choose to give them, so don't give me that party line bulls**T. The banks saw the quick easy money and they went for it and they made trillions, CEO's made 100'ss of millions and WE ARE NOW paying them in bailout money. You want party line the major bailout was George Bushes & Paulsons idea

The NEW WALMART is AIG, Wachovia, Goldman Sachs etc etc and they are getting billions each of yours & my money, what so when this economic crisis is over they can go back to their same old ways, WHY NOT Government YOU & I Will just bail them out, Sound like WELFARE FOR BIG BIZ...Say all you want but its the truth any way you try to spin it:juggle::thinking:

[MMI Enterprises 289]

Man yer smokin somethin over there aren't you? Anyone can see that yer reading too much into what I have said.

There goes free market, :lgbugeyesDUH, free market went out the fricking door one of the 1st bailouts Bush & Paulson did and now every other bailout they are doing. McCain wants to bailout everyone. So by the way you say it its OK to throw free market out the door as long as we are bailing out banks, investment companies, insurance companies all big biz or corporations to the tune of over a trillion dollars+? That OK in your eyes obviously? Right?:lgbow::lgbonk:I doubt I conveyed that I believed in or wanted a bailout. I said to effect it was probably necesarry to free up credit markets. I believe the non paying idiots should be accountable and those that make a living in real estate continue their livelyhood too. Hey newsflash, it turns out Obama said something to effect he was calling for the hold to apply on those in good standing or making good faith payments or some such wording. Whatever it was it was dumb talk as it pretty much the default condition that everyone is under at any given time. Most folk are about 3 month from a going into foreclosure so he made no sense. Was like he was affirming general law or something.

But bailout a single home owner and THERE GOES FREE MARKET, you are so funny:banghead: Your way funnier trying to twist a foreclosure hold into actual success/renegot/bailout. Such is still at expense to tax payers by way of the bank getting screwed. Adjusting/renegotiating has been going on and many, if not the majority, has already reworked their deals or their's have become the bad paper already. How much is expected to still come..I don't know, do you? Where's that subprime failure end..surely not one single home owner. Yea credit markets may be froze pretty good with the stock market volatility but not for every case. Why freeze up the realestate market that much more by allowing the idiots a free pass to hold the banks hostage longer. Trump is on right now talking about foreclosure opportunities..funny eh. So anyways..not everyone deserves or is entitled to be in them houses. They scum bags half of them. Others are just upset that they barilly making it or that they are upside down in their house and can't get out. Folks that have planned or need to move elsewhere have to have the guts to take it in the shorts rather than dumping it on the books.

Now let me tell you what you don't realize. I live in region where alot of subprime failure went down. I have shopped and browsed the bad paper up close. Probably walked 30 of them a couple month back. They are not sweet HO Joe places. The owners live elsewhere and the banks left to kick out the renters. Some trashed real good too when they left. Others still coming on market have been vacant for monthes and monthes but haven't went through the processes. Market is about dead but still a free market based on the steady inflow and availability. The inflow has been slowing down some and prices someplaces settling while outlying tending to still fall. Mess with inflow now and yer just playing with fire risking a natural balance trying to take place. They need to focus on easing the credit and getting people into them houses at what they truly worth. End the inflow they go up falsely and bamm we back in subprime default problem once again. Maybe where you at the pricing to reasonable value is not so noticable. Here we got ding dongs from expensive bay area that came over steadily for years forcing prices up at astronomical rate that the area's income just couldn't sustain. Sorry, I just don't have $600k to spend on a house that would have been $250k 5 years earlier.Neither did many others but they bought them anyways. Many bought them for that much with an assumption they be worth more a year later. Ding dongs..

Sounds fancy and complex where all this bailout money is supposedly going but where it is really going is to make up that huge dollar difference between $250k and $600k per house. Where did that money go?. It didn't goto the bank. They made interest income. The false value/inflation of those houses went into pocket of joe and then back into housing market or stock market, etc. The market fall was needed as it based on unreal values. Banks only holding them cause new guy can't afford it cause for one thing the bottom finally fell out as it rightly should have. Yes banks are both inspiration of problem and victim of their own greed but just as much so it was joe that sold and paid too high.

Now uncle sam is gonna slow the buy frenzi down and do everything it can to get the values back up on something really worth way less.

So its alright if Bush & Paulson bailout the very businesses that caused this whole economic crisis? But if Obama puts a hold on a foreclosure for a few months...Not even a bailout, its the end of the world & free market in your eyes because why? Oh thats right because Obama did it not GW. I really thought you were smarter to see through the partisanship BS

Reading way too much partisan/Bsh junk into it. It is valid point that holding up the course of events is a rip off to the free markets. It is valid also that in bailing out your ship you survive. That's to say we the people own them big business by way of our retirements and investments. You'll never admit that point and will go on beating your ownself or peeps.

I don't like any of it, there is no more free market as we knew it. I don't like bailing out homeowners that made bad moves and sure in hell hate that we will spend over 2 trillion + bailing out big biz. I guess thats the problem liberal Jeff thinks none of this bailout crap should be going on no matter who proposes it, you just dont like bailing out when Obama proposes it:applause::lolsign:. HELLL Obama isnt even saying bail them out, he's saying put the foreclosure on hold I don't like it either..but say Obama enough and you believe he can fix it all..lol..I don't like idea of anyone slowing down the natural evolution of the housing situation and getting other more worthy/responsable people in them.

Please Kev explain why its OK for Bush & everyone else to bailout these banks , insurance companies etc etc but put a hold on foreclosures to JOE SIX PACKits not OK, Please define and defend this in your right wing ways. can't wait to hear this bulls**t

Am hardly right wing..just right. You got me pegged for someone else that likes bailouts..The joe sixpack talk is getting old Jeff. Your Joe sixpack is a lazy mofo, he's really got a beer gut and doesn't deserve crap. Put yer money on beer and you come out rich.

What is it you just don't like JOE SIX PACK average American?:lgwave:

Joe's not average... he's dumb and a yuppie that buys everything.. yup I'll buy that, and that, and that..(and that obama bs where he fixes everything for me with a wave of his hand and it not cost no one a dime)..

On other hand average Jeff or Kev pay their bills as well as his bills through the bailouts/renegotiations/keeping him in his $600k house.

Total joke:lglolly:

Yup being concernd about slowing commerce/economy that much more is all a big joke Jeff.

Edited October 14, 2008 by MMI Enterprises

[Double07 14]

Man don't you understand, its not just Fannie & Freddie mac, its WORLD WIDE all kinds of big biz is being bailed out. NOT just Freddie & Fannie. It was made easier and suggested to give loans to lower income people that yes shouldn't have gotten the loans. BUT the banks DID NOT HAVE to give those loans, they weren't told they had to. There are MANY MANY banks that did not give loans to lower income, these banks that did choose to give them, so don't give me that party line bulls**T. The banks saw the quick easy money and they went for it and they made trillions, CEO's made 100'ss of millions and WE ARE NOW paying them in bailout money. You want party line the major bailout was George Bushes & Paulsons idea

The NEW WALMART is AIG, Wachovia, Goldman Sachs etc etc and they are getting billions each of yours & my money, what so when this economic crisis is over they can go back to their same old ways, WHY NOT Government YOU & I Will just bail them out, Sound like WELFARE FOR BIG BIZ...Say all you want but its the truth any way you try to spin it:juggle::thinking:

Yea they did. Kind of like a good old rainbow push coalition move. Loan the money or you are racist!! Racial strong arming my friend!! Now Bwarny Fwank won't agree with that statement hahaha! It's a ACORN thang...you wouldn't understand!

[Jeff 232]

Man yer smokin somethin over there aren't you? Anyone can see that yer reading too much into what I have said.

LOL My Joe Six Pack. I just stole it from you all's girlfriend Ms. Palin. I figured she shouldn't have all the rights to that

Kev, we all should be very mad, this really all could of been avoided from the get go. They threw good biz/bank practices to the wind and let it roll which was just wrong. Sure I blame the damn homeowners but if you go back 20-25+ years the banks/lenders never would of given out these s**t loans. So thats why I throw it back on the lenders and big biz the reaped all the benefits for years and now you and I pay

I dont defend the dumb homeowners i was just countering what I hear out of the right often, that its all the homeowners fault

[MMI Enterprises 289]

Jeff, Make sure to watch this guys archives to see if todays little economic debate on cnn shows up: Jeremy Siegel Article Listing Doubt it will show though cause he got thrashed by the other guy. Sorry..missed other guys name, but he spoke the truth of it. It's all inflationary and the stock prices/housing market had to fail cause it valued falsely. Was almost word for word what I saying.

[Russell Cissell 65]

When someone can borrow money to buy equities, how can it possibly not falsely value the market? The big issue is less about regulation than it is oversight.

[MMI Enterprises 289]

btw.. whole lot of truth comin from Russell unknown writer. Thanx for sharing that Russell.

[MMI Enterprises 289]

When someone can borrow money to buy equities, how can it possibly not falsely value the market? The big issue is less about regulation than it is oversight.

Yup.. if we think back and realize the word for such folk was always speculator/gambler. That word investor or investing that is pushed on the public so much these days smells too much like the word saving..as if it was all a sure thing.

Over a year back before the major crash I told neighbors that it has to crash and that it would...mark my words, Told them no way no how am I buying a house (or rather it's equity as you point out Russell) for as much as they were. Neighbor laughed at me. I doubt he remembers the convo. Blinded by the light of all the money had in his invisable equity. Now he upside down. Typical buy now cause it gonna do nothing but go up. Turned out a similar scenary to the whole false valuation of the enron stuff didn't it..