FACT: US Republicans caused the global meltdown

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by DubDubDubDot, Jan 21, 2010.

  1. #1
    All of this goes back to one simple thing; the Republican controlled government in the early to mid 00's not putting a stop to the ridiculous lending practices by banks who were then passing the loans off to Fannie and Freddie.

    Those two were set up to purchase loans that banks were otherwise not comfortable awarding. Banks however eventually abused the system, approving just about every loan, knowing that it was of no risk to themselves since they were going to sell the loan to Fannie or Freddie........ and the Republicans just sat idle while it was happening.

    It's funny how American voters are starting to turn on the Democrats now. Sure, you can say they could be doing a better job, but who are you going to replace them with? Do you honestly believe that the people best suited to fix the problems are the people who caused the problems?
     
    DubDubDubDot, Jan 21, 2010 IP
  2. Reseg

    Reseg Peon

    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    21
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2010
    Reseg, Jan 21, 2010 IP
  3. DubDubDubDot

    DubDubDubDot Peon

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    13
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    Yes, I am aware that the program began under Clinton. However Congress was Republican controlled at that time, and it was a plan that both sides were on board with.

    The $#!& hit the fan after Clinton had left office and the Republicans didn't want to add regulations to curb lending abuse. Then it got so bad that they realized something had to be done, but were paralyzed by the fear of being blamed for popping the a housing bubble - that Americans would blame stricter lending regulations on a housing collapse, so Republicans did nothing.

    Those changes should have been put into place in 2002 or 2003, but playing the boogie man with Iraq and terrorism were the first priority during that period. And I do not believe that lenders would have used these practices had Gore been awarded the presidency by the Supreme Court instead of Bush. Republicans historically allow big business to do whatever it wants, and the lenders took advantage of that.
     
    DubDubDubDot, Jan 22, 2010 IP
  4. ncz_nate

    ncz_nate Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,106
    Likes Received:
    153
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    153
    #4
    I can't stand reading rubbish like this. Red vs. blue.. f#ck off. If you're an adult you should be ashamed of yourself.
     
    ncz_nate, Jan 22, 2010 IP
  5. Traditione

    Traditione Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #5
    0. Personal responsibility trumps all else. Life is a GAME, with rules that are set, and unless you follow those to a T or learn how to break the ILLUSION those rules present, you will lose. Getting tricked into a loan you cannot afford is YOUR OWN FAULT. Go read before you go to a bank.
    1. A society with less laws will function better
    2. A society with a civilian review board will always function more efficiently than a government one
    3. More federal regulations hamper progress and safety
    4. Red vs Blue arguments are indeed fully blown retardation
    5. Look to 1912 or 1947 and maybe earlier for the source of the problems you mentioned directly
    6. The State is a social servant, not your nanny and parent and caretaker
    7. You are defended by idiotic kids on both side of the aisle who couldn't care less about political crap
    8. Obama has a larger majority in Congress now than Bush EVER EVER EVER had.
    9. Republicans have been out of majority power for the better part of the 1900s
    10. Democrats need to obtain testicular fortitude and represent something instead of being the party of No Action.
     
    Traditione, Jan 22, 2010 IP
  6. DubDubDubDot

    DubDubDubDot Peon

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    13
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    What exactly did I say that was incorrect?
     
    DubDubDubDot, Jan 22, 2010 IP
  7. DubDubDubDot

    DubDubDubDot Peon

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    13
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    100% agreed. Home buyers didn't have to use the entire amount they were approved for.

    But those who were responsable during those years have every right to be upset at the government for not regulating the ability of these idiots to get such loans.
     
    DubDubDubDot, Jan 22, 2010 IP
  8. Traditione

    Traditione Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #8
    I agree, it is incomprehensible that the government or other review panels saw these programs and did not raise red flags. If there were warnings presented, none of those made it out to the public en masse.

    There was a time when the majority of people didn't borrow money, lived within their means, and saved more than they spent.

    When you talk like this, it sounds like this magical time period was half a century or more ago, NOT true! In the late 80s to 90s finances were pretty legitimate and solid, then came the technological bubble that created a false atmosphere.

    Though it is ultimately your responsibility to control your life, it is a little tough to know if that can of soup is poisonous if the people you hired to protect you will not be honest. It's almost a question of who exactly are these people working for if not for us, you know?
     
    Traditione, Jan 24, 2010 IP