Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP

Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DedicatedDom40 -> Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 7:09:12 PM)
We are your bubble economy and derivatives experts! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/ With all these Clintonistas on the Obama payroll, no wonder reform has stalled and the problem hasn't been solved yet. The only thing we are headed for under Clinton II (Obama) is round 2 of this clusterfuck. Obama, Geithner, Summers & Bernanke, LP, where our motto is "What you need for that hangover is more hair of the dog!"

tazzygirl -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 7:25:14 PM)
Funny how everyone wants to lay the ills of our economy at Obama's feet.

GraciousLady -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 7:43:22 PM)
Yes I do want to lay it at his feet. He's the president. We elected him to fix our economy. He said he was going to fix things and was even a party to the first stim package Bush did. If you will remember Bush called him in and consulted with him since he was the president elect. He became responsiable for our economy when he took the job. He did not make the mess but he sure is the one who is supposed to fix it. If he is not responsiable what the hell is he doing in the White House? It does not matter if you agree with him or not it's HIS job to fix it. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Funny how everyone wants to lay the ills of our economy at Obama's feet.

tazzygirl -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 7:48:45 PM)
quote: He said he was going to fix things and was even a party to the first stim package Bush did. If you will remember Bush called him in and consulted with him since he was the president elect. Bush considered Obama the president-elect last october?

DemandingLeader -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 8:37:03 PM)
Over the past 20 years, Ayn Rand's theories were put on trial via one of her disciples named Greenspan. Randites, having read Atlas Shrugged, think they know it all, but when discussing business and economics always sound like middle school boys discussing sex in the locker room - lots of self interest but never intelligence or maturity. After all that has happened in the past 15 months, its amazing her books still sell today. But they do, and were recently boosted by the manufactured socialism claims related to Obama. Think about that for a minute. Her theories cause a real, proven economic collpase, but her books still sell because of a feared, unproven alternative that is fear-mongered by the likes of Glenn Beck. Just how dumb are we?

tazzygirl -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 8:48:02 PM)
Hmmm.. maybe im just too tired and need to go to bed.. but you just totally lost me. Because we are afraid of the likes of Beck, our economy is going to hell? Im so thinking im misunderstanding you.

Lorr47 -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/20/2009 8:48:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DedicatedDom40 We are your bubble economy and derivatives experts! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/ With all these Clintonistas on the Obama payroll, no wonder reform has stalled and the problem hasn't been solved yet. The only thing we are headed for under Clinton II (Obama) is round 2 of this clusterfuck. Obama, Geithner, Summers & Bernanke, LP, where our motto is "What you need for that hangover is more hair of the dog!" The banking industry has five lobbyists for every congressman. Durban tried to pass social banking legislation which did not please the banking industry and the republicans voted 100 percent against the legislation. The banking industry is the most powerful lobby in Washington per Durban and the republicans vote 100 percent for whatever the lobby wants. To say Obama is responsible for a "stall" is assuming that reform had a chance with such a "loyal minority" in congress. I agree people like Born are preferable but so far all we have seen is that the democrats are inept at ruling and the republicans are perverse human beings only interested how much money they can pick up from lobbyists. Born is right. This will happen over and over. Greenspan, the libertarian, who admitted his model was wrong has also warned of civil war. I would say about 2015.

Politesub53 -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 1:27:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Bush considered Obama the president-elect last october? Oh Tazzy my sweet, I suspect Bush considered this wayyyy before October. [;)]

tazzygirl -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 1:33:31 AM)
LOL... i meant officially, gesh

pahunkboy -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 7:40:43 AM)
this is pretty easy to fix. And we do have a shred of hope up until of course nukes break out in 2012. 1. We must return the Glass Steagall standard. 2. We must enter the 4 powers agreement for a CREDIT system- not the current monetorist system. 3. Ron Pauls audit and abolish the fed legislation is a good move toward the goal.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 8:08:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Funny how everyone wants to lay the ills of our economy at Obama's feet. Not the ills; but the inept and ineffective actions his Administration has taken to date to correct the problem; more troubling since there is a filibuster proof majority of his own party ready to rubber stamp any initiative. Apparently he doesn't have any solution and can't even think outside the box. "Bush Stimulus II" points to that reality. However instead of focusing on the economic solutions he's compounded them by pushing forward health care legislation which would exacerbate the problem by increasing the already record setting deficit. The Administration has disenfranchised the private sector, except in those cases where they've failed or have paid into a special interest PAC. Backing big business failures and 'business as usual' political pay back are not the sources of the 'CHANGE!' promised in the campaign. Recovery does not come from public sector employment growth it comes from small to mid-sized private sector expansion. There is none and will be none under the current entitlement granting, special interest payout, bureaucratic expansion policies coming from Washington. Tax revenue is down because businesses are contracting and fewer people are working. Obama bailed out big business failures the result; executive bonuses paid a rank and file employees laid off. A perfect example being GM. 'Saved' by tax payer money the GM bureaucracy in place and the Saturn line terminated, the plant closed, all the workers terminated; but shilling for Chicago's Olympics was more important when that news was coming down. That blame lies entirely at the feet of President Obama.

rulemylife -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 10:44:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Not the ills; but the inept and ineffective actions his Administration has taken to date to correct the problem; more troubling since there is a filibuster proof majority of his own party ready to rubber stamp any initiative. Apparently he doesn't have any solution and can't even think outside the box. "Bush Stimulus II" points to that reality. However instead of focusing on the economic solutions he's compounded them by pushing forward health care legislation which would exacerbate the problem by increasing the already record setting deficit. The Administration has disenfranchised the private sector, except in those cases where they've failed or have paid into a special interest PAC. Backing big business failures and 'business as usual' political pay back are not the sources of the 'CHANGE!' promised in the campaign. Recovery does not come from public sector employment growth it comes from small to mid-sized private sector expansion. There is none and will be none under the current entitlement granting, special interest payout, bureaucratic expansion policies coming from Washington. Tax revenue is down because businesses are contracting and fewer people are working. Obama bailed out big business failures the result; executive bonuses paid a rank and file employees laid off. A perfect example being GM. 'Saved' by tax payer money the GM bureaucracy in place and the Saturn line terminated, the plant closed, all the workers terminated; but shilling for Chicago's Olympics was more important when that news was coming down. That blame lies entirely at the feet of President Obama. You know Merc, you truly are amazing. No matter how many times you are rebutted and proven wrong you just go on repeating the same false statements.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 10:59:40 AM)
quote: No matter how many times you are rebutted and proven wrong you just go on repeating the same false statements. Your detailed and referenced reply hasn't caused me to amend my position. You rebutting the Saturn plant closing again? For 'Sping Hill' - THIS is reality: Eventually, GM decided to move production elsewhere. The last Saturn made in Tennessee rolled off the line in 2007. After retooling, GM started building the Chevrolet Traverse in Spring Hill, but that production is now on its way out too. In November, it will be moved to a plant in Michigan, leaving Spring Hill's plant idle. The Bush II 'Stimulus funding a second round of executive bonus payouts? The double digit unemployment rate? The record setting deficit? Reduced tax revenue? Care to point out the positive policies, procedures, and/or initiatives implemented by the Administration to reverse those results or even create a positive trend? That there are fewer people reporting for first time unemployment can't be it. With some places, like CA at over 12% unemployment all that means is that there are less employed people to influence that percentage result. I'm glad you are pleased and happy with the result of this Administrations actions. Sorry to rain on your political party based parade of good tidings.

rulemylife -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 11:14:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Your detailed and referenced reply hasn't caused me to amend my position. You rebutting the Saturn plant closing again? For 'Sping Hill' - THIS is reality: Eventually, GM decided to move production elsewhere. The last Saturn made in Tennessee rolled off the line in 2007. After retooling, GM started building the Chevrolet Traverse in Spring Hill, but that production is now on its way out too. In November, it will be moved to a plant in Michigan, leaving Spring Hill's plant idle. Of course it hasn't. Because the last time you brought this up you didn't even know Spring Hill was making Chevys and not Saturns. You also keep overlooking the fact that the phasing out of Saturn began in 2007, yet you keep trying to make this the fault of the Obama administration. And I've given you detailed and referenced sources on another thread, which apparently you have chosen to ignore. Not to mention the plant is considered "idled" by GM, not closed. In fact, they are the leading contender for production of a new GM sub-compact. I would address your other points, but I already have on more than one occasion and I'm beginning to realize the futility.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 11:23:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Your detailed and referenced reply hasn't caused me to amend my position. You rebutting the Saturn plant closing again? For 'Sping Hill' - THIS is reality: Eventually, GM decided to move production elsewhere. The last Saturn made in Tennessee rolled off the line in 2007. After retooling, GM started building the Chevrolet Traverse in Spring Hill, but that production is now on its way out too. In November, it will be moved to a plant in Michigan, leaving Spring Hill's plant idle. Of course it hasn't. Because the last time you brought this up you didn't even know Spring Hill was making Chevys and not Saturns. You also keep overlooking the fact that the phasing out of Saturn began in 2007, yet you keep trying to make this the fault of the Obama administration. And I've given you detailed and referenced sources on another thread, which apparently you have chosen to ignore. Not to mention the plant is considered "idled" by GM, not closed. In fact, they are the leading contender for production of a new GM sub-compact. I would address your other points, but I already have on more than one occasion and I'm beginning to realize the futility. People were employed at a GM plant - GM was bankrupt the 'bail out' was advertised and sold as a way to save jobs by President Obama. It failed in the case of those working at the plant. They could have been making paper clips - the Administration invested tax dollars which benefited the executives and their special interest campaign contributers. Obama's bail out benefited them - the workers are unemployed. The bail out funded by tax dollars and initiated by Obama - FAILED. "Idled" or "closed", like dying of disease or from a sudden accident - the workers' jobs are still DEAD. Go back to the important issues like your daily review of FOX and Rush. Its what the 'believers' have been told is more important. Better to focus on them than the reality that obviously you can't change or even make a case for, the Administration's actions producing positive trends. quote: they are the leading contender for production of a new GM Will they get together the same crack committee that went to get Chicago the Olympics when they were a "contender"?

GraciousLady -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 3:06:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: He said he was going to fix things and was even a party to the first stim package Bush did. If you will remember Bush called him in and consulted with him since he was the president elect. Bush considered Obama the president-elect last october? I realize I did not give enough detail to make sense. Let me take a shot at it :-) The whole stimulis /TARP/Bailout thing was George W's idea. He began putting it together in January or Feburary 2008. It has been a continuous and evolving plan since then. The first monies was released before the November presidential election. George W invited the president elect (Obama) to the White House in, I believe, mid December to brief him about the second stimulus monies so Obama whould be ready to move asap after he took office. This is the money Obama released in an effort to save the banks right after he took office. (TARP) That money was actually money George W had put aside for Obama. You see, the whole stimulis thing is not Obama's idea. Nor is where or how it has been spent. George W had it all taken care of before a new president was elected. Obama has not done one thing that he has not been told by George W or Pelosi. As a matter of fact, Pelosi was George W's righthand in the formation and implimentation of the stimulis package. This is the reason Merc calls the TARP money Obama released Bush Stimulis 2. In short Obama is a puppet. He knows little about politics, That's why he was overseas stumping for his home town to get the olympics when his top military advisors were begging him for face time to help them with the war we are in. I do not agree with Bush, Obama or the war but this is just what is going on.

Politesub53 -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 3:45:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GraciousLady I realize I did not give enough detail to make sense. Let me take a shot at it :-) The whole stimulis /TARP/Bailout thing was George W's idea. He began putting it together in January or Feburary 2008. It has been a continuous and evolving plan since then. This doesnt make sense either. You are apparantly suggesting Bush started on a bailout plan in winter for a crisis which took place six months later.

GraciousLady -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 4:13:37 PM)
Everyone knew it was coming years before. I was in real estate when all those crazy nodoc loans were being given. That was Clinton that made the mortgage companies do that so everyone could own a home. I was approving people for new home loans who made minimum wage. They could not qualify for a car loan and we had to, by law, give them loans to buy a house. They could also have a credit score in the 500's! It was insane. They got help with the down payments in government grants or were allowed to finance over 100%. What I'm saying is, people were borrowing the full price of the house pluse the down payment plus the closing costs. And if they could not afford the payments they were given ARMS (adjustable rate mortgages) instead of fixed rate loans. I sold lots of houses while telling my broker my clients could not afford the loans and were going to lose the house when the mortgages adjusted. That's what happened. Bush, and everyone else in the financial sector, knew with the financial state of the country and all those ARMS adjusting the bottom was going to fall out of the economy. And it did. quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: GraciousLady I realize I did not give enough detail to make sense. Let me take a shot at it :-) The whole stimulis /TARP/Bailout thing was George W's idea. He began putting it together in January or Feburary 2008. It has been a continuous and evolving plan since then. This doesnt make sense either. You are apparantly suggesting Bush started on a bailout plan in winter for a crisis which took place six months later.

Politesub53 -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 4:21:09 PM)
Your last post isnt the problem. You claimed Bush was working on a bailout plan early in 2008. If this is true there should be a link for it, in which case you can post it for us. If you should houses knowing full well people could not afford the repayments, you are more to blame than Obama. Sorry if that sounds harsh but its how i see it.

Politesub53 -> RE: Clinton, Rubin, Summers & Greenspan, LP (10/21/2009 4:27:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Your last post isnt the problem. You claimed Bush was working on a bailout plan early in 2008. If this is true there should be a link for it, in which case you can post it for us. If you should houses knowing full well people could not afford the repayments, you are more to blame than Obama. Sorry if that sounds harsh but its how i see it. I have reposted my edit here. Reading your post again i saw you mention you had to give out the loans under law, In which case I apologise. I do have two questions though. Are you saying Clinton passed the laws and if so, why didnt Bush change them during 8 years in office. My question is resonable since you were quick to blame Obama who hasnt been in office a year yet.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125