patrick.net

And by the way, you right-wing twits who never respond seriously to any questions or debate - the internet you're posting via was developed with public 'socialist' money.

Number one effective way to start living your dream: stop posting.

Just sayin'...

Bap33 says

That may be why he goes on vacation and just plays along, for the most part, because he knows he was placed in a non-winning situation.

That is the line where your bias is most evident.

Bap33 says

names I tie to this mess are B.Frank and his boyfriend Franklin over at Fanny.

It's a fairly small part of it. Barney didn't ask that people be able to walk in and totally lie about their income to get a mortgage. The fraudulent securities, derivatives and shadow banking system didn't evolve to meet the needs of borrowers. They evolved more to exploit the demand for investments. Fraudulent investments were created to meet that demand, and lack of regulation allowed an entire unregulated shadow banking system to develop.

Sure liberal's good intentions added to the demand for real estate, and for mortgage money, and maybe indirectly to the perception that prices can only go up. But how stupid is that ? And how stupid is it not to protect people from predator lending practices. Let the buyer beware ? Sure, but if the lender is implying to a poor guy that he can afford a home that he actually can not (and even the stupid lender is thinking he might be okay because the home will go up another 20 percent in a year), I put at least as much blame on the sptupid lender, who is being told from above, "LEND, LEND."

I do think you're right about the seven years though, maybe somewhat longer.

If I were Troy, there is a particular graph I would would show you now.

Bap33 says

A big “reset” button is going to be pushed. I do not know when, nor how bad it will be, but my gut feeling says it will not be fun for about 7 years (a biblical thing)

Is there a Rapture involved in there somewheres?

I find it much more likely things will just moderately suck, then they'll get better.

There is indeed a certain segment of the population that desires the "Mad Max cleansing" because they think all the impure will be toast, and they of course will thrive. The prospect of the Tea Party Skinhead Bangers plundering their houses and raping their women, they'd not be so thrilled at actualities I think.

Bill Clinton promised back in his 1992 campaign to "make it a high priority of my administration to see to it that EVERY American will own their own home by the year 2000." Obviously, he was playing to those that had the dream of homeownership but didn't have the means. He set into motion, especially when Glass-Steagall was eliminated, policies (via Fannie & Freddie) that, with the Government being the "lender of last resort," helped the liberal lending policies that floated the real estate bubble. Bush enacted the exact same policies, with Congress et all being very happy to go along with the entire unsustainable fraud. Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc. have a lot of responsibility for this mess because they were in a position to KNOW and do something about it. Instead, they encouraged, from their powerful positions, these policies that led to the collapse.

Now wait a minute there giggles. You've argued repeatedly in the past for LESS gov involvement and less regulation. Now you're saying that gov should have been more involved and fixed everything? Specifically of course the democrats.

Its been said before, but your posts are just a joke. You have no idea what you're saying or what you want to or think should have happened.

Kentm - clearly you're the one who has no idea what happened. Ray simply stated the obvious...big government had no business manipulating the housing industry. If government had kept its nose out of the real estate business, the market would not have reached for the sky, only to collapse in the end.

What needs regulation is the government, beginning with Congress. Its time to drain the swamp. Its time to get rid of Reid, Pelosi, Boxer, Barney, Finestein, Waters, Waxman, Finegold, and the other co-conspirators who have driven America to her knees.

Why do you always jump in after I post? Its like you're a grade school kid standing around waiting for me to come out of the doors at recess...

So anyway listen, you can't argue two sides of a point at the same time simply because it favors your argument... So it was the elimination of 'Glass-Steagall ' that created all of this and when 'Glass-Steagall was in effect' things were fine? But 'Glass-Steagall' was government regulation. So what do you want, less or more government regulation?

Also, this is apparently a thread about the evils of Socialism, why post about the origin of the housing bubble?

kentm says

You’ve argued repeatedly in the past for LESS gov involvement and less regulation. Now you’re saying that gov should have been more involved and fixed everything? Specifically of course the democrats.

Please copy & paste any comment I have ever made in which I stated the Government should not have regulated the mortgage business. Furthermore, I have stated a number of times repealing Glass-Steagall was a huge mistake and needs to be reinstated.

Politicians from BOTH parties pressured the lending institutions to loan money to people (primarily minorities) that were marginal borrowers at best. This effectually lowered the bar for all lending practices and underwriting of loans.

Obama's socialistic "bailout" for GE. GE receives almost $25 million stimulus money and responds by laying off 18,000 U.S. workers. Just another fine example of our wonderful government at work.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-administration-gave-general-electr

RayAmerica says

Please copy & paste any comment I have ever made in which I stated the Government should not have regulated the mortgage business.

"Its time to drain the swamp."

What do you mean by statements like that if not that you want less gov regulation? Dude, you just talk around yourself...

So what do you want, more or less gov involvement?

EDIT

RayAmerica says

Obama’s socialistic “bailout

AND the bailout was NOT Socialism. JHC. Socialism is an economic theory where workers - you and me, buddy - control the means and flow of the labour and divide the profits based on merit. In the societal sense its effectively a distribution of benefits in an equal and orderly manner to ALL of the members of that society. Police, Fire dept, public education, highways, etc. It has NOTHING to do with gov giving money to corporations. Damn, if you're going to argue against something at least know what you're saying.

AND the bailout was begun by Bush...

The Japanese often use a little emoticon that we don't see much over here, "orz". Its intended to symbolize a little man on their hands & knees banging their head on the ground in frustration. Thats me right now.

RayAmerica says

Please copy & paste any comment I have ever made in which I stated the Government should not have regulated the mortgage business.

Kentm's answer: ZERO .... nothing copied & pasted because it doesn't exist. LOL

orz

kentm says

Socialism is an economic theory where workers - you and me, buddy - control the means and flow of the labour and divide the profits based on merit.

Eh, what? Employee-owned companies, cooperatives, ? Or more like GM's Saturn experiment which the unions hated and ultimately destroyed? Not sure what you are attempting to describe here.

kentm says

In the societal sense its effectively a distribution of benefits in an equal and orderly manner to ALL of the members of that society.

You are missing the central planning, which requires "central planners", which typically involves a privileged class of individuals which inevitably leads to tyranny. . Socialism means many things to many people. It means state-owned-everything to some people (borderline communism) on one end and activist central planning/regulation with a free market living within centrally controlled parameters (borderline capitalism) on the other. The most effective socialist countries are the latter not the former if I remember correctly.

I think you more accurately described "communism" with your second statement but you left out the "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". This is where your particular version of socialism causes knee jerk reactions as it smacks of communism. We know how well that works...

We should all get our "isms" correctly defined - Ray seems to think uncontrolled capitalism is the answer while you appear to be pushing towards communism. I prefer the middle-ism ;)

I like the -ism where a committee of overpaid fools take a turn at running a company. Every few years they play musical chairs and move to committees at other companies, so they never have to live with the long-term impact of their decisions. This seems to be working swimmingly! Can we apply it to countries too?

EightBall says

Eh, what? ...

I was describing 'socialism' as its defined in a basic dictionary sense... I agree it would be nice to agree on what socialism is as a starting point to a chat on socialism, but it seems like every time someone uses the world here it has a different meaning. Whatever implications it may have to one person or another, and certainly there are various levels & applications of it, there is a definable idea/theory at the core of the word.

A while ago I'd have thought one thing at least we ought to easily agree on that its not is a government giving money to large banks & corporations. I'm actually honestly amazed at how that has been so easily linked with the word 'socialism' when its almost exactly the direct opposite of a socialist action.

EightBall says

You are missing the central planning

Well... as I understand it the monolithic 'central planning' aspect is a part of one political theory on a way to implement socialist ideas. I was only talking about the basic economic aspect...

But all countries/systems are built on mishmashes of various philosophies and ideologies and the US actually currently has a lot of socialist ideas built into its current system. The police, the fire dept, public parks, public education etc, are all examples of socialist political philosophy in action.

But I think I understand what you mean by 'central planning', you mean a state run production system that makes decisions and gives directives to the entire system it directs, unconnected from supply and demands.

EightBall says

you appear to be pushing towards communism

My ideal is actually something close to Canada, a country which seems to work quite well.

kentm says

I was describing ’socialism’ as its defined in a basic dictionary sense

No you weren't. You were a lot closer than Ray, but socialism does not mean "owned by the workers" It means "owned by the state for the benefit of the people". Owned by the collective, with no state, would be real communism (which has *never* been tried in a population of more than a few hundred. The only places where it exists is in pockets of tribal communities and, well, communes).

All you've described is employee ownership, which is still a form of capitalism, the kind that left libertarians would love. That's not a coop either -- that's "customer owned", which is a little different.

kentm says

My ideal is actually something close to Canada, a country which seems to work quite well.

???

Canada has a basic economy more or less identical to the US. The key differences are:

- Canada doesn't spend much on its military, because it is under the US defense umbrella
- Instead, canada puts its tax money into health care and education
- Canada uses much less oil than it produces, allowing for significant revenue.

Take away that oil, and canada is in the same financial situation as every other country with a high standard of living.

Kevin says

No you weren’t.

Thanks for the clarification, I'll look into it more.

Kevin says

All you’ve described is employee ownership

Works for me. :-) But its sort of incidental, my real issue is with whats being ignored in how the US is structured, ie what aspects of "socialism" are already incorporated, and what it means to us. The thing that really gets me going, and I've wasted far too much time on this thread already, are two key points:

1 - People like Ray are happy to reap the benefits of aspects of "socialism", as long as they don't outright call it such, but are so angry to have to give anything back. All I hear them talk about are their rights and never is there any mention of any kind of personal responsibility.

2 - The other thing is this crazy notion that Obama is somehow a marxist-socialist-communist, introducing marxism-socialism-leniniism-shariaism to the US. Or something. Its just crazy-talk and I can't barely believe that people saying it even believe it themselves.

I came across this a day ago while looking for something else and I think it probably sums up the situation better than I could paraphrase so here it is in part and a link. Please visit the site, "The Toad Report", it seems to be quite good:

http://toadthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/03/from-each-according-to-his-ability-to.html

In fact, let's look at the 10 main points of Communism and see how well Obama is following his so called political ideology.

1. Abolition of property and land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Nope, nothing Obama ever talked about.

2. Heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Since 1913, has been getting smaller and smaller since 1980.

3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. Nope, nothing Obama ever talked about.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. Nope, nothing Obama ever talked about.

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. Since 1913 we have had a National Federal Reserve banking system but it has never been a monopoly and no one is talking about making it one. The first national, central bank in the US was created back in 1791 so you know, you can't blame that on Obama because he was still killing Christians and white people back in Kenya.

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. Well, since the advent of the Interstate Highway system that has been in the hands of the government and there is a virtual communication monopoly by AT&T but it isn't government run, just capitalism in its purest form.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of wasteland, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with common plan. Hmm, cultivation of wasteland would be a great idea, unless of course it's the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge...Wait, so Bush was a Communist?

8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. Industrial armies??

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country. White people have built themsleves all kinds of suburbs abandoning the cities and building on once country pastures abolishing the distinction between town and country but again, that's market forces and the free market doing that. Suburbanites are Communists!

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of childrens labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. Oh God no! Free education, no child labor?? Grab the hammer and cycle and run for the hills! Well, we have had free, unequal, public education for many many years now so yet again, nothing to do with Obama.

Obama is a complete failure as a Communist.

and this is a nice capper:

But the Teabaggers of the world still say that he is living up to Marx by following the idea of, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" and Sean Hannity says this is taken right from the pages of the Communist Manifesto. Well, it isn't. But that's beside the point. Let's assume for a minute that statement was Obama's motto and if it were true, should he be labeled a Marxist? Communist? Let's see:

Acts 4:32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

Oh my God, Obama is a........................................Christian.

Thats it, I'm done with this thread. I am rubber and you are glue. Ray, good luck with your Obama bashing. He has a lot to be taken to task for, but socialism ain't one of them.

If patriots and freedom loving people are negatively referred to as "teabaggers", then libs must be "douchebaggers" or maybe "colostomybaggers".

kentm says

Thats it, I’m done with this thread. I am rubber and you are glue. Ray, good luck with your Obama bashing. He has a lot to be taken to task for, but socialism ain’t one of them.

Socialism typically makes advances in a society incrementally. What most people I know object to regarding Obama & BUSH, etc. is that the march is ultimately heading towards a socialist state with the only difference between the GOP & Democrats is the speed in which it is achieved.

RayAmerica says

What most people I know object to regarding Obama & BUSH, etc. is that the march is ultimately heading towards a socialist state with the only difference between the GOP & Democrats is the speed in which it is achieved.

You need to get some new friends...

RayAmerica says

Socialism typically makes advances in a society incrementally.

That's so wrong of a statement I don't even know where to begin.

Socialism of the sort you would have found in the soviet union or china pretty much happened over night. A brief civil war, then the socialists took over and took everything.

For the more mixed economies with limited socialism (Norway, South Korea, etc.), things also happened more or less over night.

The idea that america is creeping towards socialism is fucking ridiculous. There is less state ownership of industry today than there was at any time since World War II. Most of what remains are public utilities, vice (liquor, gambling), and that big insurance company called Medicare. Taxes are the lowest that they've been since the depression.

How can anyone with a brain claim that the trend is towards socialism?

Honest Abe says

“colostomybaggers”.

lol ... that is a pretty funny one

RayAmerica says

A fine example of generalizing an entire movement that is made up of Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc.

I'm trying to find any references to TeaBaggers supporting anyone other than FAR RIGHT social conservatives. Perhaps you can help show how these supposed "Democrats and Independents" in your group, demonstrate their presence?

Do they support for example Western Democrats who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism, but are socially liberal? Nope. They don't even like Ron Paul. Based on results, the Tea Party produces the same output as if they were Fox News footsoldiers.

Hahahahaha - Western Democrats who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism - hahaha. Oh, wait, I get it, they take a hard line on being against fiscal conservatism.

Can you to identify any of those pink-panty waste, ColostomyBagger, liberal defecrats "who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism"?

Abe ... funny thing. I noticed he didn't provide any names. It's amazing to me how many of these liberals just spout of nonsense that can't be supported. This is the same type of ilk that's running the government.

Honest Abe says

Hahahahaha - Western Democrats who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism - hahaha.

The Blue Dog Coalition has 50+ members, listed here:
http://www.house.gov/melancon/BlueDogs/index.html

Most self-styled "independents", it is just coincidence they always vote Republican.

I'm extremely socially liberal, and I can guarantee that I'm more economically conservative than most people. I support policies that would reduce federal government spending by more than 3/4ths and would roughly cut taxes in half.

But I also support sanity, and it's not sane to defend military spending, social security, and medicare, while decrying taxes!

RE: Social views: Conservative vs Liberal. If (big if) personal responsibilty were left in-tact, then I would be a full on libertarian. But, liberal/socialist/progressive/leftist types have removed all personal responsibilty from anyone they do not feel threatened by. OTOH, if a person poses any type of threat to actions or ideals of the liberal/socialist/progressive/leftist types, or exibits any form of independance and freedom despite GOV actions, then they are held to an exacting personal standard, far above that of any social safety-net accesser.

RE: Fiscal views: Conservative vs Liberal. You should be able to earn as much money as you can within the limits of the law. You should be able to keep as much of your money as anyone else does. Flat tax is fair. Taxes should pay for stuff that makes the entire group equally safe, productive, comfortable. Defense, Fire, Police.

Schools MUST be privatized right away. That will close a huge hole in the GOV pocket and reduce the liberal influence of tomorrows leaders. Joe's Middle School would have tuff rules, and better students than the public crap out there now. The liberal adgenda has made public schools their on-going experiment. End it now. Vouchers, private, what ever it takes. Take a look at who opposes any move away from public education, and you may agree that there is a possible liberal bias ... maybe.

All Television and Internet transmission should be ended at 9pm and restart at 5am. Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

Bap33 says

All Television and Internet transmission should be ended at 9pm and restart at 5am. Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

What, and force people to go back to magazines for their porn? Perish the thought!

Bap33 says

All Television and Internet transmission should be ended at 9pm and restart at 5am. Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

Do you even know how the internet works?

Bap .... warning: don't attempt to debate "Kevin.' He thinks he knows more than all the Founding Fathers combined. The guy is an absolute genius.

Bap33 says

Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

Thanks for asking. 2am cut-off times are bullshit. In areas where there's a cut-off time, it means that for the next hour there will be a bunch of drunks on the road. People still drink after 2, they just have to do it somewhere else. It's like not selling beer on Sunday - people still drink beer on Sunday, they just buy twice as much to ensure they don't run out.

Bap33 says

The liberal adgenda has made public schools their on-going experiment.

In order to remain competitive in this world, our adgenda must change. and yes, I am fully aware that I spelled that incorrectly. Hard to believe, considering I am a product of the liberal adgenda's schools. As is Bap.

lol .... ellie ellie ellie ..... lol ....you know what I mean. The social twists being introduced in schools have ZERO to do with smarter, more productive voters. It has everything to do with making the social misfits of life feel beter for being queer.

Kevin, my point is more about being a productive member of society. If cutting off drinking times makes sense, then so does cutting of monitor entertainment. Ellie is correct, it only moves the location of whatever desired activity a person is after. Of course a person could just pop in a CD .... just as a drunk can just go to their fridge and open a case. In truth, personal acountablility would mean that bars serve you all you can pay for and if you die, you die. If you drive and kill someone, you die. If you get cought driving drunk you never ever ever get to drive anything that is not painted bright orange-pink with the words "DRUNK DRIVER" in huge bright green letters wrote all over the car with your name on both doors and the front and rear windows. Second offence means you never drive again, and you MUST wear an orange-pink jumpsuit whenever in public with the words DRUNK DRIVER wrote all over it in bright green letters and your name on the front and back. Third offence and you are put to death. That would usher in personal accountablity ... and then bars would be open whenever. I am all for full on personal accountablity to force those who enjoy freedom to act correctly, vs intrusive laws that only limit the behavior of those that follow laws.
How does that tie to in-home intertainment? Let me explain. 90% of all dope smoking, listless, unproductive people enjoy staying up late being entertained. Not only should welfare people have limited entertainment, their ligts should all go off at 9pm and an alarmed wakeup should happen at 5am, giving them all a great start towards a productive day .... and all welfare should require drug testing, and all signle moms that use welfare should have mandatory NORPLANT. ..... I know, I know, I sound stupid. I'm just blowing off some frustration. When I have to watch each dime that I spend at Savemart, and then I have to watch Maria the hyper-breeder (she's about 19 with two kids in-tow and is also prego) pass through line ahead of me with two full baskets, buying alot of stuff with an EBT card... I admit it, I get a bit pissed.

Babb33, I like your last comment. It was not too long for me to understand, mainly because you has something to say and said it. I've gotten that complaint about too long, or mentally taxing as the case may be. I realize that you can't fit all meaningful ideas into a slogan or feeling. Feelings connected to logic is passion. I'm glad you are a little pissed off, but only a little? That implies socialism is a little problem in the USA. Teeny weeny.

Bap33 says

....all signle moms that use welfare should have mandatory NORPLANT. ….. I know, I know, I sound stupid.

It sounds like you believe in Eugenics. I suspect Voter Literacy Test would have been on your list if you'd gone on a bit longer. Being from SouthEast, I know what those were used for.

Again with the impossible social guarantees. Why is it eugenics to be more kind than to let nature terminate reproduction? Preventing conception by welfare moms who live is more pleasant than letting them and their children die based on their own merits, right? Quite a leap of accusations. Troll, troll, troll.

Bap33 says

If cutting off drinking times makes sense, then so does cutting of monitor entertainment.

You already failed because you think the internet is "monitor entertainment".

Bars closing at 2am, not selling liquor on sundays, and state-owned liquor stores are just hold overs of the temperance movement. It's bullshit that doesn't actually work, and it's a terrible basis for any argument about anything other than, perhaps, liquor laws.

Bap33 says

When I have to watch each dime that I spend at Savemart, and then I have to watch Maria the hyper-breeder (she’s about 19 with two kids in-tow and is also prego) pass through line ahead of me with two full baskets, buying alot of stuff with an EBT card… I admit it, I get a bit pissed.

Why don't you just go and be more successful?

Kevin,

I think maybe you misunderstood Bab33's point. It doesn't make sense, with the general population. Right after Bab33 wrote: "Ellie is correct, it only moves the location of whatever desired activity a person is after." He said that kind of thing made sense for people on welfare, not fully functioning adults (and by extension their young children). I think we agree the blue laws have little merit.

Go on to be more successful? This is not a free-market economy. It's half way to what you want, right? Please everybody, see the video Money as Debt. The job market is fixed by the fractional reserve banking system. Here is a link:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=5DBF509405ABE238

Please watch it. It is very entertaining and informative. It would be worth having a thread about it.