Quote:
It does?
According to republicans ... if you don't have a job you're to lazy to work.
It does?
According to republicans ... if you don't have a job you're to lazy to work.
Anybody lose their unemployment yesterday?
- Thread starter Dunkopf
- Start date
- Status
Quote:
Oh .. them people again ... who are them people?
How about the slum lords who let their property run down and then let the bank reposes the property when it's trashed.
Oh .. them people again ... who are them people?
How about the slum lords who let their property run down and then let the bank reposes the property when it's trashed.
Quote:
It does?
According to republicans ... if you don't have a job you're to lazy to work.
The sickness in Western society is not a party political thing. Have you not noticed how, behind the window dressing of policy differences, each successive government of any colour follows the same broad path as its predecessor? Politicians have learned what happens to a leader who breaks ranks.
It does?
According to republicans ... if you don't have a job you're to lazy to work.
The sickness in Western society is not a party political thing. Have you not noticed how, behind the window dressing of policy differences, each successive government of any colour follows the same broad path as its predecessor? Politicians have learned what happens to a leader who breaks ranks.
- Thread starter
- #304
Quote:
I'm sure that, like other countries, the US has standards that apply to imported goods as well as home produced. If you see a difference in quality between two brands it's likely to be either that one is made to standards higher than the minimum or, in the case of imports, the inspection may have been inadequate. I would expect that some imported products are better than certain home produced equivalents.
The issue is not the comparison of quality it's the availability of home produced goods and their affordability. That's means that it's about wages in the home country compared with those in the exporting countries. If you want to work for low wages making things you can't afford to buy, then it's clear what you have to do. You can't have high wages for all and cheap home produced goods.
This is not new and it is not the cause of the recession. The recession was caused by governments borrowing to cover budget deficits whilst stupidly assuming that economic growth would continue and they would be able to fund debts from your taxes. Add to that governments' decisions to bail out the banks who made poor decisions in order to earn short term bonuses and there is your recession. The taxpayer pays for all of that with no recourse to the Courts.
I applaud appeals to buy home produced goods but it will not end the recession and will require a most buyers to be willing to pay more and workers to take big pay cuts.
If you want to get out of this and reduce the chances of it happening again, change the banking system and make governments accountable at law for screwing up your life's efforts. The US once had a President who wanted to reform the banking system from the top. What he put in place probably would have prevented, or at least ameliorated, the damage done today and been an example to the rest of the world:
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/executiveorder11110.htm
I beleive the economic crisis was caused by the housing bubble ie; fanny mae and freddie mac, leaning on banks and mortagage companies to ease lending practices. they were buying up these sketchy mortagages until the bubble burst. that sent banks, insurance companies, mortagage companies, and stock markets into a freefall. So what did they do spent hundreds of billlions of dollars proping them up buying up all the bad paper from these co's while foreclosing on the middle class. Does this make sense to anybody, these lending instatutions got their money out this deal what about the folks who bought houses through these preditory lending practices. They are now living out on the streets, in cheap hotels, or in homeless shelters. If the gov't would have kept their noses out of the private sector I dont beleive this would have been near as bad as it is.
ETA This is only my opinion I dont expect others to agree with me I am just rambling at random.
Actually it was a lot more involved than that. It started when they relaxed Federal lending requirements so low income and people with less than perfect credit could buy housing. This was actually a huge segment of the country and included a lot of middle class people as well as low income. Then the lenders took advantage of the relaxed requirements and started doing a lot of imaginative lending. In addition to that Congress repealed the Glass Stengal act. That allowed banks to dabble in the stock market. Before that they had lending banks and investment companies. Banks were allowed to lend and sell low interest CD's and such. All of it was in safe holdings. They were not allowed to play with investor money. All the sudden banks could gamble with their millions or in some cases billions of dollars. Meanwhile there are lenders giving ARM loans to people that don't know what a loan is. They get in with a 600.00 payment and 3 years later they have a 1200.00 payment, they also did 100's of thousands of no money down loans. All of this made the housing market skyrocket. Of course it all crashed.
I'm clueless about the bail outs. They're just like the stimulus. One person will tell you they were needed and did good. The next will tell you the exact opposite. There's no way to actually prove anything on either one. we'll never know if our economy would have collapsed without the TARP. We'll never know how many jobs the stimulus actually created. All we know for sure and I think everyone will agree on this. It's a MESS.
I'm sure that, like other countries, the US has standards that apply to imported goods as well as home produced. If you see a difference in quality between two brands it's likely to be either that one is made to standards higher than the minimum or, in the case of imports, the inspection may have been inadequate. I would expect that some imported products are better than certain home produced equivalents.
The issue is not the comparison of quality it's the availability of home produced goods and their affordability. That's means that it's about wages in the home country compared with those in the exporting countries. If you want to work for low wages making things you can't afford to buy, then it's clear what you have to do. You can't have high wages for all and cheap home produced goods.
This is not new and it is not the cause of the recession. The recession was caused by governments borrowing to cover budget deficits whilst stupidly assuming that economic growth would continue and they would be able to fund debts from your taxes. Add to that governments' decisions to bail out the banks who made poor decisions in order to earn short term bonuses and there is your recession. The taxpayer pays for all of that with no recourse to the Courts.
I applaud appeals to buy home produced goods but it will not end the recession and will require a most buyers to be willing to pay more and workers to take big pay cuts.
If you want to get out of this and reduce the chances of it happening again, change the banking system and make governments accountable at law for screwing up your life's efforts. The US once had a President who wanted to reform the banking system from the top. What he put in place probably would have prevented, or at least ameliorated, the damage done today and been an example to the rest of the world:
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/executiveorder11110.htm
I beleive the economic crisis was caused by the housing bubble ie; fanny mae and freddie mac, leaning on banks and mortagage companies to ease lending practices. they were buying up these sketchy mortagages until the bubble burst. that sent banks, insurance companies, mortagage companies, and stock markets into a freefall. So what did they do spent hundreds of billlions of dollars proping them up buying up all the bad paper from these co's while foreclosing on the middle class. Does this make sense to anybody, these lending instatutions got their money out this deal what about the folks who bought houses through these preditory lending practices. They are now living out on the streets, in cheap hotels, or in homeless shelters. If the gov't would have kept their noses out of the private sector I dont beleive this would have been near as bad as it is.
ETA This is only my opinion I dont expect others to agree with me I am just rambling at random.
Actually it was a lot more involved than that. It started when they relaxed Federal lending requirements so low income and people with less than perfect credit could buy housing. This was actually a huge segment of the country and included a lot of middle class people as well as low income. Then the lenders took advantage of the relaxed requirements and started doing a lot of imaginative lending. In addition to that Congress repealed the Glass Stengal act. That allowed banks to dabble in the stock market. Before that they had lending banks and investment companies. Banks were allowed to lend and sell low interest CD's and such. All of it was in safe holdings. They were not allowed to play with investor money. All the sudden banks could gamble with their millions or in some cases billions of dollars. Meanwhile there are lenders giving ARM loans to people that don't know what a loan is. They get in with a 600.00 payment and 3 years later they have a 1200.00 payment, they also did 100's of thousands of no money down loans. All of this made the housing market skyrocket. Of course it all crashed.
I'm clueless about the bail outs. They're just like the stimulus. One person will tell you they were needed and did good. The next will tell you the exact opposite. There's no way to actually prove anything on either one. we'll never know if our economy would have collapsed without the TARP. We'll never know how many jobs the stimulus actually created. All we know for sure and I think everyone will agree on this. It's a MESS.
- Thread starter
- #305
Quote:
It does?
According to republicans ... if you don't have a job you're to lazy to work.
The sickness in Western society is not a party political thing. Have you not noticed how, behind the window dressing of policy differences, each successive government of any colour follows the same broad path as its predecessor? Politicians have learned what happens to a leader who breaks ranks.
It sure seems that way. The 2 parties both speak in different tongues, but in the end we get the same result. I always hear a lot of talk, but I don't see much action. All they accomplish is polarization of the people.
It does?
According to republicans ... if you don't have a job you're to lazy to work.
The sickness in Western society is not a party political thing. Have you not noticed how, behind the window dressing of policy differences, each successive government of any colour follows the same broad path as its predecessor? Politicians have learned what happens to a leader who breaks ranks.
It sure seems that way. The 2 parties both speak in different tongues, but in the end we get the same result. I always hear a lot of talk, but I don't see much action. All they accomplish is polarization of the people.
Quote:
The sickness in Western society is not a party political thing. Have you not noticed how, behind the window dressing of policy differences, each successive government of any colour follows the same broad path as its predecessor? Politicians have learned what happens to a leader who breaks ranks.
It sure seems that way. The 2 parties both speak in different tongues, but in the end we get the same result. I always hear a lot of talk, but I don't see much action. All they accomplish is polarization of the people.
Yes, I think that the people are more divided than are the politicians.
The sickness in Western society is not a party political thing. Have you not noticed how, behind the window dressing of policy differences, each successive government of any colour follows the same broad path as its predecessor? Politicians have learned what happens to a leader who breaks ranks.
It sure seems that way. The 2 parties both speak in different tongues, but in the end we get the same result. I always hear a lot of talk, but I don't see much action. All they accomplish is polarization of the people.
Yes, I think that the people are more divided than are the politicians.
- Mar 29, 2009
- 1,624
- 20
- 161
Quote:
I don't think that is done by accident and it can be very effective.
Its one of the first types of manipulation you learn in Psychology.
I don't think that is done by accident and it can be very effective.
Its one of the first types of manipulation you learn in Psychology.
Quote:
I don't think that is done by accident and it can be very effective.
Its one of the first types of manipulation you learn in Psychology.
Divide and rule.
Fear and rule.
I don't think that is done by accident and it can be very effective.
Its one of the first types of manipulation you learn in Psychology.
Divide and rule.
Fear and rule.
Quote:
I don't think that is done by accident and it can be very effective.
Its one of the first types of manipulation you learn in Psychology.
Divide and rule.
Fear and rule.
Hitler sure did a good job of it!
I don't think that is done by accident and it can be very effective.
Its one of the first types of manipulation you learn in Psychology.
Divide and rule.
Fear and rule.
Hitler sure did a good job of it!
Oh yeah, just to stir the pot, don't you love how the politcal party who want all Nativity sets removed from public property, are, now, so concerned that the umemployed are losing their benefits, at Christmas time.....All of those children, who aren't going to get anything under the tree......What a bunch of hypocritical jokers.
- Status
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
Just got back from a week away and …
- Started by Dynamissa
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
-
-
-
Two dead chicks in brooder pen
- Started by redinator
- Replies: 68
-
No tails and some bald backs and other spots.
- Started by Hannah J
- Replies: 67
-
