You are not logged in. Please register or login.

misterID
 Rep: 475 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

misterID wrote:

No way. I seriously don't see the appeal. He would fall apart. The dude always looks frightened.

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 330 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

Smoking Guns wrote:

He is a pussy, like Obama. But he is polished and likeable and also a Hispanic.

Cruz is terrible. I hate Cruz.

misterID
 Rep: 475 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

misterID wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:

He is a pussy, like Obama. But he is polished and likeable and also a Hispanic.

Cruz is terrible. I hate Cruz.

Obama can win a room and would eat Rubio's lunch.

I always felt Obama doesn't like being president.

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

johndivney wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:

You admit the housing crisis goes back basically to making sure everyone got a house correct? And who propped up those toxic loans and predatory lending to mainly African Americans? THE FUCKING DEMOCRATS. then it all collapsed because everyone got in on it and everyone started taking advantage of it, even the banks because it was easy money. Not everyone needs their own home or free cell phone or free college tuition. It is that mentality that creates this entitlement nanny state that will hurt us for decades to come.

Smoking Guns wrote:

ID, please look up the history on the housing market collapse. Then come back and discuss after you get the refresher course.


i REALLY don't want to get into the middle of the debate on american politics but there is a point here i believe is slightly incorrect.
ok, "the housing crisis goes back basically to making sure everyone got a house correct?" well, kinda but no, not exactly. the housing bubble came about in many countries that had NO government driven schemes such as the in the US.

when you say about people taking advantage of it, then you're getting closer to the truth of the the cause. they just packaged that shit & found people complicit to sell it onto all the way down the line. a fraudulent system ripe for exploitation was the problem, not government policy on housing.

this idea of lending to mainly black people as a cause is really distasteful - or the idea of mainly lending to the poor as the reason.
what caused the bubbled wasn't owner-occupiers such as the low-income people you're describing (or attempting to describe).

the bubble was caused by speculators: middle to high income earners who took the loans and became speculators - that's the crap that wasn't sustainable, those are the people who got greedy & stupid (but they were just doing what they were told to do by crooks and/or other greedy & stupid people).

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

AtariLegend wrote:

off topic: Johnny I'm personally not fond of our local politicians, I may despise Tory/Labor... but I'm glad they're more relevant than the DUP/Sinn Fein "our wee local UTV politicians".

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 330 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

Smoking Guns wrote:
johndivney wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:

You admit the housing crisis goes back basically to making sure everyone got a house correct? And who propped up those toxic loans and predatory lending to mainly African Americans? THE FUCKING DEMOCRATS. then it all collapsed because everyone got in on it and everyone started taking advantage of it, even the banks because it was easy money. Not everyone needs their own home or free cell phone or free college tuition. It is that mentality that creates this entitlement nanny state that will hurt us for decades to come.

Smoking Guns wrote:

ID, please look up the history on the housing market collapse. Then come back and discuss after you get the refresher course.


i REALLY don't want to get into the middle of the debate on american politics but there is a point here i believe is slightly incorrect.
ok, "the housing crisis goes back basically to making sure everyone got a house correct?" well, kinda but no, not exactly. the housing bubble came about in many countries that had NO government driven schemes such as the in the US.

when you say about people taking advantage of it, then you're getting closer to the truth of the the cause. they just packaged that shit & found people complicit to sell it onto all the way down the line. a fraudulent system ripe for exploitation was the problem, not government policy on housing.

this idea of lending to mainly black people as a cause is really distasteful - or the idea of mainly lending to the poor as the reason.
what caused the bubbled wasn't owner-occupiers such as the low-income people you're describing (or attempting to describe).

the bubble was caused by speculators: middle to high income earners who took the loans and became speculators - that's the crap that wasn't sustainable, those are the people who got greedy & stupid (but they were just doing what they were told to do by crooks and/or other greedy & stupid people).

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-the- … is-2009-10

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc … is/249167/

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

johndivney wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:

-snip


yes, ok, the door was left ajar. BUT it still doesn't explain how countries without a fannie/freddie suffered a housing crisis? it's a global crisis/meltdown.
you can't just blame the thing on one ill judged policy.
or maybe you can.
what the fuck do i care.
it really depresses the shit out of me. no joke. it fucks with my head so much. just people & their fraud & their fucking greedy bullshit. fuck, i wish i'd never opened this goddamn thread. i wish i could just bury my head in the sand. i try sometimes.
i mean look at that fucking prick shkreli in the most popular article on theatlantic (or just about everywhere today). that fucking bullshit, it's just never ending.

i'll just have to disagree with you on this one buddy. just to me it makes little sense logically to try & pin the blame on low-income owner/occupiers, that's all. but whatever, y'know??

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 330 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

Smoking Guns wrote:

It is not the low income earners fault at all.  It was the policy they came up with to give them loans that was the issue.

It was unsustainable.  The influx in loans meant influx in sales, mean increased demand, meant increased costs, meant more foreclosures, then the financial crisis hit and thousands of people foreclosed...  They created the "sub prime" market.. That means they gave loans to people with bad credit, etc with variable rates so it was cheap at first but after 5 years the rates went up causing a major cluster fuck.  The whole system was fucked up.

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

buzzsaw wrote:

Wait until the health care bubble bursts. I'm not even sure it's a bubble...more like a pimple. Until they deal with the cost issues of health care, nothing else is going to even scratch the surface of making health care affordable. Insurance companies aren't the issue. They are part of the circle, but not the driving factor.

Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread

johndivney wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:

It is not the low income earners fault at all.  It was the policy they came up with to give them loans that was the issue.

That means they gave loans to people with bad credit, etc with variable rates so it was cheap at first but after 5 years the rates went up causing a major cluster fuck.  The whole system was fucked up.

We're going round in circles here. The crisis hit in countries that didn't have a Fannie/Freddie Mac policy. I'm not saying that that wasn't a cause however.
They gave loans to people with bad credit, yea, that's a bit different from the wording you used previously. This was where the policy got exploited & corrupted - by people speculating then unable to sustain, not by owners/occupiers.
Anyway yea we're going round in circles. The whole system was fucked up you're right there, & it still is. So it goes..

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB