Republicans Take Over House Ready to Spar With Obama

gimpy117 · 01-06-11, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

CThey have also exclusively been at the helm for the past two years. Quite simply, what they are doing is not and has not been working.

You can't just walk up to the recession box and flip the switch to OFF Takeda. the fact of the matter is, These things take time.

But where is the logic anymore? Putting in the same people who caused the mess 2 years later because the other party hasn't been able to fix their mess fast enough? But it figures, we are the United states of amnesia.

Takeda Shingen · 01-06-11, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

You can't just walk up to the recession box and flip the switch to OFF Takeda. the fact of the matter is, These things take time.

I agree with you; you cannot simply flip a switch. But that is not how the Democrats sold their legislation. There were going to be green jobs, shovel-ready projects and general job creation all around. None of it happened, and they knew that none of it was going to happen.

gimpy117 · 01-06-11, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I agree with you; you cannot simply flip a switch. But that is not how the Democrats sold their legislation. There were going to be green jobs, shovel-ready projects and general job creation all around. None of it happened, and they knew that none of it was going to happen.

A lot of those jobs were going to "cost way to much money". Which is ironic because nobody on both sides of the isle batted an eye when they decided to continue with the republican bailouts.

as far as im concerned, those banks should still be under direct government control until we get every cent back.

Takeda Shingen · 01-06-11, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

A lot of those jobs were going to "cost way to much money". Which is ironic because nobody on both sides of the isle batted an eye when they decided to continue with the republican bailouts.

as far as im concerned, those banks should still be under direct government control until we get every cent back.

Those bailouts were wrong. The Democratic Party had the opportunity to stand on principle and stop them. They did no such thing.

Are the banks to be like General Motors? They gave the money back, but are still majority-owned by the government. That's the problem with government bailouts; once given, the government never relinquishes conrtol. And since the government generates no revenue, it makes you, and I and every other American now responsible for a failed company. Given the track record of the banks, I do not want that responsibility either.

gimpy117 · 01-06-11, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Those bailouts were wrong. The Democratic Party had the opportunity to stand on principle and stop them. They did no such thing.

Are the banks to be like General Motors? They gave the money back, but are still majority-owned by the government. That's the problem with government bailouts; once given, the government never relinquishes conrtol. And since the government generates no revenue, it makes you, and I and every other American now responsible for a failed company. Given the track record of the banks, I do not want that responsibility either.

The problem is, there is one true bipartisan thing in washington, being in the pocket of big business especially the banks. So i am not suprised the Dems did nothing. Especially when they were being told the Apocalypse was going to start without a bailout. The only reason GM is still under government control is because they haven't sent enough money, booze, and "escorts" to congress yet.

Ducimus · 01-06-11, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

The only reason GM is still under government control is because they haven't sent enough money, booze, and "escorts" to congress yet.

Armistead · 01-06-11, 02:22 PM

What gets me about these banks, we bailed them out over the housing crisis they created and got rich off of. Due to the fall out, prices dropped.
A house worth 200K in some areas may be worth 100K. Owners that needed to get out couldn't sell it for near enough to pay the loan, so they either try to get a modification or go into foreclosure.

However, it was better for the bank to foreclose as the government paid them for the full value of the loan, minus a percentage for the home, usally 30% of tax value and the bank keeps the home. Not only that the banks could charge the government high late fee's, all legal fee's, ect. on top of that and no regulation to check the cost, just whatever they add.

So instead of working with the homeowner to keep the home with a mod, they made more from the government than what it could be sold for...and it the end the banks still own the home. The kicker is now the loan is paid for and they're sitting on billions of dollars of homes they'll sell higher as the economy improves.

Course these banks paid well for each congress seat they control, mostly GOP.

Growler · 01-06-11, 02:46 PM

At this point in our history, our economy is near-inextricably intertwined with our politics. Our politics is geared toward making money for those with access to the policymakers. We've now got the best government money can buy, and we keep paying for it. It isn't party-dominant; they're all in it together. All party division does is make it easier to figure out where the money came from, corporations, or social enterprises.

01-06-11, 05:06 PM

Amazing how much the partisan left is now about compromise. You know who you are. Gridlock in D,C. is the best we can hope for. Republican agenda gains is what we voted for. By a greater margin than BHO was elected I might add.

mookiemookie · 01-06-11, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Growler

At this point in our history, our economy is near-inextricably intertwined with our politics. Our politics is geared toward making money for those with access to the policymakers. We've now got the best government money can buy, and we keep paying for it. It isn't party-dominant; they're all in it together. All party division does is make it easier to figure out where the money came from, corporations, or social enterprises.

Too true. It's not R vs. D anymore. It's those with money vs. YOU.

01-06-11, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Too true. It's not R vs. D anymore. It's those with money vs. YOU.

Or those who want the opportunity to have money and those whose failure of vision accept poverty.

If you want to own that it is your decision. Many don't like it and reject your failure.

It is about vision.

Growler · 01-06-11, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Too true. It's not R vs. D anymore. It's those with money vs. YOU.

Me, personally?

Nah. I don't have anything anybody'd want, unless you count a collection of beer bottle caps, empty cans of compressed air, and a few burnt-out compact florescent bulbs that I've not disposed of yet.

nikimcbee · 01-06-11, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Too true. It's not R vs. D anymore. It's those with money vs. YOU.

I think you are correct. They were just talking about the MILLIONS of dollars spent by the unions in the ore-gone guv election.

I'm not going to whine about money and politics, but you'd think they'd spend it on better things, like improving the schools

.

01-06-11, 02:46 PM	#8
Growler A long way from the sea Join Date: May 2005 Location: Iowa Posts: 1,913 Downloads: 21 Uploads: 0	At this point in our history, our economy is near-inextricably intertwined with our politics. Our politics is geared toward making money for those with access to the policymakers. We've now got the best government money can buy, and we keep paying for it. It isn't party-dominant; they're all in it together. All party division does is make it easier to figure out where the money came from, corporations, or social enterprises. __________________ At Fiddler’s Green, where seamen true When here they’ve done their duty The bowl of grog shall still renew And pledge to love and beauty.

01-06-11, 02:22 PM	#7
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	What gets me about these banks, we bailed them out over the housing crisis they created and got rich off of. Due to the fall out, prices dropped. A house worth 200K in some areas may be worth 100K. Owners that needed to get out couldn't sell it for near enough to pay the loan, so they either try to get a modification or go into foreclosure. However, it was better for the bank to foreclose as the government paid them for the full value of the loan, minus a percentage for the home, usally 30% of tax value and the bank keeps the home. Not only that the banks could charge the government high late fee's, all legal fee's, ect. on top of that and no regulation to check the cost, just whatever they add. So instead of working with the homeowner to keep the home with a mod, they made more from the government than what it could be sold for...and it the end the banks still own the home. The kicker is now the loan is paid for and they're sitting on billions of dollars of homes they'll sell higher as the economy improves. Course these banks paid well for each congress seat they control, mostly GOP.

01-06-11, 05:06 PM	#9
The Third Man Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Amazing how much the partisan left is now about compromise. You know who you are. Gridlock in D,C. is the best we can hope for. Republican agenda gains is what we voted for. By a greater margin than BHO was elected I might add.