Log In | Register
Conservatives are already propagating various myths about the budget; The Progress Report offers these debunks:
Right-Wing Tax And Budget Myths
Seeded on Sun Mar 1, 2009 9:13 AM EST
Article Source: Think Progress- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (106)
The right-wingers are trying to get people behind their agenda and to acomplish the goal they're attempting to instill fear but it's not working. Sorry guys but there are no longer enough people to fall for your tactics. Your days are numbered!
- 26 votes
Listen up Obama, you did an incredible job using the Internet, Cellphones and millions of people to help get you elected.
Now, use the same resources to educated them. Use them to educated others.
Obama, it time to truly educated the masses. Then, let them decide. Do not let Right Wing Wackos spread fear to 95% of the people so the 5% elite can keep in power.
Remember Obama, the Right Wing Republican Wackos are going to mobilize the Evangelical Churches and their ministers to spread fear.
“Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”: FDR’s First Inaugural Address
- 20 votes
One of the worst things happening right now in America is that the functionally illiterate within our nation are being asked to grapple with complex issues while being emotionally manipulated and misled by the Republican politicians and pundits.
Those people are using every trick in the book to make them believe that times were really very good under George Bush and that if only they were still in power we wouldn't be having any economic problems.
Remember John McCain and his phony campaign suspension.
- 16 votes
space guy
Comment collapsed by the community
Comment collapsed by the communityPaul Lucero Comment collapsed by the community
Comment collapsed by the community"Mr. Obama's "cap and trade" plan for reducing carbon emissions by electric utilities and other companies would require all Americans to pay more for energy, they suggested."
Nice way of saying "we want to plant this in your head" Caps and trades is old....the only difference now is when they bid out the caps and trades it will be from day 1 of the operation of the plant rather than "when you hit a certain level" the price reflection of the caps and trades is not more expensive and they get more caps and trades in the deal.....gives the cleaner power companies a way of turning a better profit by selling their credits to dirtier plants.......Republican smoke and mirrors.
"Obama proposes to increase the top individual income tax rate by 13%, and the second individual income tax rate by 10%"
Yep. from 35% to 38% at the top rung and from 30% to 33% at the next rung......now, I am a business man which most people in that rung are.....if you are a wage earner I can tell you this that you may not have known...I write off my trucks, fuel, office equipment, feed for my cattle, medical benefits for my employees, farm equipment, vet bills, depreciation and a whole slew of things that you cannot. My tax percentage when my CPA is done is about the same as yours...just more payout. Don't let these Boobs fool you....
- 16 votes
"The Chamber is pointing out that attempting to balance the budget on the backs of businesses will harm California’s economy, thereby reducing state revenues and hampering the state’s efforts to stabilize its budget"
And in California they are correct, what they should do is get rid of that damned Proposition 13 that Reagan shoved up their wazoo years ago that Bankrupted Orangecounty and get the money from those multi-million dollar mansions that are paying property taxes from 1975 levels.
And again....the corporate tax rate is also not telling the whole truth...in Europe they don't have the creative loopholes that we have for corporations......why do you think huge businesses like DOW and IBM pay No taxes at all?
- 14 votes
TAX LESS, SPEND LESS is the only Answer!
Since consumer spending is down 40% from last year, what good will taxing less do? And if we spend less how will that help the decline in demand?
- 12 votes
All your numbers are lies. Not a single one of them checks out.
"Obama proposes to increase the top individual income tax rate by 13%, and the second individual income tax rate by 10%"
So you're saying that the highest bracket, currently at 35%, will go to 48%? And the next highest, currently at 33%, will go to 43%? Where do you get those numbers?
"Obama proposes to increase the capital gains tax rate by 33%"
Long-term CG is, at the highest income level, is 15% (can be as low as zero if your income is low enough). Are you saying it's going up to 48%? That's just nutty.
I could go on, but I'll stop there.
- 16 votes
From: http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/27/obama-budget-small-business-personal-finance_obama_budget.html
The administration proposed allowing the Bush tax cuts for the top two brackets to expire at the end of 2010, just as I--and many others--had predicted it would. That means the top two rates on ordinary income go back up in 2011 to 36% and 39.6%, from 33% and 35% now. (One particular is a little ugly however: the mother of all marriage penalties. The higher rates kick in at $200,000 for a single individual and $250,000 for a married couple filing jointly.)
I understand there was talk at one time in the Clinton Treasury of having a lower rate for income from a small or medium business. Perhaps that idea will or should be revisited, since these high rates will be very hard on those small and medium businesses that operate as pass-throughs. Meanwhile, the administration proposes taking the top capital gains rate back up to 20% from its current 15%.
-----------------------------
You'll note that both of the "increases" are just reversions back to pre-Idiot, I mean Bush, numbers.
Didn't your mother tell you never to lie?!?!
- 13 votes
Something new:
What Paul is doing is a pathetically transparent numbers trick to make the tax increases seem higher than they really are. He is saying that they are going up 13%. Any honest person would make the assumption you did, thinking that he means from 36% to 49%. But, he is being cute because they are going up 13% of 36%, not 13% in real terms.
I'm sure he didn't think of this himself, but is parroting some right-wing propogandist. The real question is if he is in on the scam, or was just duped into believing a lie.
- 16 votes
Ahh the joys of research and truth, friend request sent jay.
- 8 votes
Well done Jay.... Technically Paul is correct, but instead of saying the taxes will be moved up to 36%...he used the alarming "percentage"
- 2 votes
So you're saying that the highest bracket, currently at 35%, will go to 48%? And the next highest, currently at 33%, will go to 43%? Where do you get those numbers?
Do you understand simple math? To make that statement it would appear not.
- 1 vote
Guys I have worked and lived through a major rescission have any of you? I have had to pay 49% in taxes to CA and the FEDS.
No Lies but experience!
BS Paul. No one, and I mean NO ONE with half a functioning brain cell is going to believe your numbers. Especially when we just read the ACCURATE numbers in the article itself. 49% in taxes? Really? Not a single person in this country pays that. Quit while you are far, far behind.
- 10 votes
BS Paul. No one, and I mean NO ONE with half a functioning brain cell is going to believe your numbers. Especially when we just read the ACCURATE numbers in the article itself. 49% in taxes? Really? Not a single person in this country pays that. Quit while you are far, far behind.
In 1982 in California I paid 43% of my income in taxes between the state and federal government. My salary? I made $26k at the time. I can just imagine what people who made $50k paid as a percentage. By 1984 with Ronnie's tax cuts I was making over $50k and yet was only paying 39% of my salary in taxes. We are returning to that era of high taxes with our dear leader Obama.
- 1 vote
Oh a couple years after Reagan dropped taxes across the board he realized, well convinced actually by Dole that taxes had to be raised to meet the budget. Guess who he raised taxes on? Anyone making less than 40k. Speaking of dear leaders.......
- 6 votes
Oh a couple years after Reagan dropped taxes across the board he realized, well convinced actually by Dole that taxes had to be raised to meet the budget. Guess who he raised taxes on? Anyone making less than 40k. Speaking of dear leaders.......
Complete and utter lie.
- 2 votes
Reagan had only one major tax cut during his time - the ERFA of 1981.
However he then signed onto the the TEFRA in 1982 , which the CBO has equated as the largest tax increase of taxes in the history of the US to the tune of .98% of the US GDP according to the Dept of the Treasury.
The other major tax cut signed by Reagan was the TRA which was actually written by two Democrats in 1986.
So while Reagan's ' tax-reduction legacy' is a bit overstated when we look at the facts , I don't see where he actually targeted people making $40,000 . He increased social security taxes and unemployment taxes, but those were (at least to the best of my research) across the board. cuts.
So Blearc, what tax cut are you referring to ?
- 3 votes
Reagan had only one major tax cut during his time - the ERFA of 1981.
yea 25%. That is all that you need. The rest you need to back up. I was there, I saw it work.
- 1 vote
From mises:
Reagan came into office proposing to cut personal income and business taxes. The Economic Recovery Act was supposed to reduce revenues by $749 billion over five years. But this was quickly reversed with the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. TEFRA—the largest tax increase in American history—was designed to raise $214.1 billion over five years, and took back many of the business tax savings enacted the year before. It also imposed withholding on interest and dividends, a provision later repealed over the president's objection. But this was just the beginning. In 1982 Reagan supported a five-cent-per-gallon gasoline tax and higher taxes on the trucking industry. Total increase: $5.5 billion a year. In 1983, on the recommendation of his Spcial Security Commission— chaired by the man he later made Fed chairman, Alan Green-span—Reagan called for, and received, Social Security tax increases of $165 billion over seven years. A year later came Reagan's Deficit Reduction Act to raise $50 billion.
Actually on the 40k claim I have a email sent to the person that made it, looking over what happened then more than likely he's taking the jumps in fuel tax and social security tax into account but I'll wait for him to get back to me. So since I can't find the numbers right now I'll retract the statement until I hear back. I take seriously my credibility.
It seems that Reagan raised some type of tax every year he was in office. And the Republicans raised the same memes that they are now; here's a good article on the subject:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/26/obama-budget-reagan-clinton-bush-opinions-columnists_higher_taxes.html?partner=links
- 6 votes
Everybody is really arguing over nothing, tax increases or no tax increases. that won't be our problem. We have no money and with out money to back up the increase in spending they will not be able to stave off inflation and when that reaches double digits all bets are off and the results just may reach catastophic proportions is I may quote a certain president. Nothing in this bill will prevent that. So people stay focused on the real issue and quit trying to detract with smoke and mirrors crap. The INFLATION train is coming and it has no brakes.
- 1 vote
Space guy,
Im calling BS on your figures too, unless you are adding in ALL the taxes you paid, ie. sales, mortgage, etc. My husband and I made nearly $100K this year and paid about 17%. I GUARANTEE you Bush tax cuts weren't 33%. By your supposed numbers and logic, we should have paid nearly 50%. You are so full of it!
- 2 votes
MedTech
Unless you are willing to post your tax returns on line I would submit that you are the one that is full of it. Just your SSN is 7.85%. I paid a considerably higher fraction of my income in taxes than you did this year and was in the same ballpark of income.
- 1 vote
Each of you using your personal experience to extrapolate a larger point are skewing the macro realities of the recovery plan.
When someone says "W over saw the longest economic expansion in US history", they may be technically correct, but fail to point out the inequality of the particpation in that expansion, the massive increase in debt, lost jobs, insolvent banks, and possibly a world-wide depression.
I think it's pretty apparent, Reaganomics has been a failure.
- 7 votes
I know a number of people making over $200k a year and they all pay less than 15% or less in taxes. When they're done with their deductions, their AGI is lower than mine and I make less than half of what they do. Conservatives often throw out the statistics regarding the percentage of federal tax revenues derived from the upper income people, but they never state the percentage of income earned by that same group. The percentage of income exceeds the percentage of taxes, meaning they aren't paying their share. So you take the increasing income disparity, which causes the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer (on an inflation-adjusted basis), and exacerbate it by having the rich a smaller percentage in taxes. If your long-term goal is the destruction of our society, this is an excellent framework.
- 6 votes
Then you need to support the fair tax. I would also have the capital gains and corporate income tax rate at the same level (20%) to skew the value toward creating wealth and not just trading wealth.
- 2 votes
I just posted this on another seed, but it applies here too. Comparing the Reagan tax rates to those proposed by Obama, it appears that Obama's tax rates are going to be in line with or below those of the Reagan era. So it does seem that the GOP, lead by Rush Limbaugh, is on a mission of myth and fear regarding the Obama economic policy. And one of the means, as also pointed out here, is to call letting the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule a "tax hike".
- 3 votes
Who needs facts when you have a fat madman and a 13 year old boy to follow and believe in?
The Republicans went so far off the rails this week that I really can't see anything to call a viable political party.
The Republicans have become a cult. One hell of a big and dangerous cult, but a cult plain and simple.
- 31 votes
#2 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 10:23 AM ESTThe Republicans have become a cult. One hell of a big and dangerous cult, but a cult plain and simple.
App description but I think that they have become a small dangerous cult as we all saw in the last two elections the moderate and independent voters have left the building.
The republicans core base seems to be just the religious right, a few rednecks and voting members of the KKK without a new direction, new ideas and new talking heads the party is doomed.
- 9 votes
I completely agree. A lot of the people I know that were once republican or maybe moderate leaning right are moving further and further to the left. I cannot believe that they can't see what a joke they have become. You would almost feel sorry for them if they weren't so dangerous.
- 10 votes
ft: And they have their fearless fat leader Rush pushing all their hot buttons like a good little member of the Third Reich.....some of you people need to read books by Washington insiders who worked for both Bush administrations...only then will you understand how scheming and dangerous this party has become. Rush wants to you take back your country? From whom? You people get crazier and crazier....
- 6 votes
This was a good article...thanks!
At the end the following kink for Accountability now:
http://accountabilitynowpac.com/
Accountability Now is an organization built around a single guiding principle: challenging the institutional power structures that make it so easy, so consequence-free for Congress to open up the government coffers for looting by corporate America while people across the country are losing their jobs and their basic constitutional rights while unable to afford basic health care.
An intersting group born out of a newly energized progressive movement...
- 17 votes
#3 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 10:26 AM ESTThanks, lightdriven! I like it when you visit my threads because you always provide us with informative links.
- 5 votes
You are welcome Power...;)
My thinking...there is no way to know everything...and there is always room in the brain to learn more.
In learning...we make better informed decisions...
- 6 votes
When does one stop learning? When they are convinced they already have all the answers.
- 5 votes
PA--that is really an excellent point...:)...wisdom.
Personally...I'll never have all the answers..I am happy to spend the rest of my days seeking to understand.
Once you understand it is only then can one be understood. Perhaps a little too philoshopical for this thread...sorry, I'll stay on topic.
- 4 votes
"When you speak, you repeat what you already know. When you listen, you learn."\
Fortune Cookie I received 15 years ago.
- 5 votes
I like this one. Uusually the most profound thoughts are delivered in the simplest packages....thank you.
It's nice to know so many years later that simple phrase stayed with you.
Did you find yourself heeding the words more often than not?
- 4 votes
I definitely try to...I just found it funny that one of the most profound comments I've read regarding knowledge isn't from reading the literary works of Confuscious, Socrates, Sun-Tsu, Ghandi, Lincoln, Roosevelt, or Jefferson, but rather through some hole-in-the wall chinese joint delivering prothetic wisdom wrapped up in deep- fried random chance.
Just goes to show us that every day is a learning opportunity.
- 4 votes
Just goes to show us that every day is a learning opportunity.
Right you are Sgt.....:)
- 1 vote
Everyone who thinks that they are 100% right are always wrong.
Democrat fan-boys are just as dangerous as the Republican ones. I just hope that Obama is smarter than his sheep, and has the wisdom to be bipartisan and bring balance between the left and right nut jobs.
- 1 vote
#5 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 12:36 PM ESTEveryone who thinks that they are 100% right are always wrong.
Agreed . This is what has killed the Republican party, their arrogance and foolish pride along with the "you too.." comments every time they are called on one of their hypocritical actions or words. ..which is has been nearly everyday now, to my complete amusement.
Jindal made me laugh for days with his rehearsed GOP propaganda bad infomercial reply to the SOTU! Funnier still, is most of it was total lies.
He is truly the quintessential Republican. LOL!!
- 9 votes
Ludwigc
I just hope that Obama is smarter than his sheep, and has the wisdom to be bipartisan and bring balance between the left and right nut jobs.
Seems to me Obama is trying to do just that, but only a handful of republicans have a clue that being bipartisan is in their best interest. All the rest are still making fantasy statements about the budget.
- 6 votes
Ah facts. We have finally found the cure for neo-conservidiot republican obstructionist idoitology. :)
Great post! I'm sure that I'll be referencing it time and time again. Thank you.
- 9 votes
#6 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 2:23 PM ESTAh facts. We have finally found the cure for neo-conservidiot republican obstructionist idoitology. :)
Every one knows that facts have a liberal bias.
- 8 votes
Yep, the indepublicans don't want any stinking facts....they want a marsh mouse to pop up out of the stimulus. Have you noticed, with the the exception of the fine poster Ftmackinc there are no more Republicans on the Vine? But boy oh boy do we have a bazillion right wing "Independents"......cowards.
- 8 votes
3sheets2thewind
What's that you say? Why are you calling Rush, Bill, Sean, Glenn, and Micheal Liberals? I mean, after-all, they do use facts don't they? Why do you hate them? ;)
Studiusbagus
Where is Tom DeLay when you need a good exterminator?
- 3 votes
I am from Louisiana and somewhat conservative.
I lowered my head after Jindal's speech. He was weak!
- 9 votes
#7 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 2:57 PM ESTThat is no reflection on the fine people from the great state of louisiana, unfortunately it was the handling of a good governor by a bad set of people from the RNC. He's being manhandled because they have put that "You can be the next President if you follow our orders" carrot.
- 10 votes
It is intertesting to note that the RNC effectively made a fool out of him.--IMHO.
- 7 votes
Boy did they! I believe they're are pre-selecting members to be scapegoats and I believe they'll continue doing this until they believe they've gotten it right. They'll probably run out of members before they get it right.
- 5 votes
#8 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 3:42 PM ESTI have a question who creates the jobs in the US, excluding the government,the answer is the rich and they have the resources available to find the loopoles to hide their profits so the don't pay the taxes. Close up the loopoles and start reducing the size of government.
- 1 vote
Do you have any data to support your hypothesis of the rich create jobs?
If it's true, then why have we lost so many jobs as the rich have gotten richer?
- 3 votes
The truth is that the Repudiated Republican Party speaks for neither the wealthy or small business owners as evidenced by the fact that 52% of Americans with an annual income in excess of $200,000 voted for Obama in the presidential election.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
And obviously did so with full knowledge of his campaign promise to allow the 2001 Bush tax cuts benefiting Americans making in excess of $250,000 to elapsed if elected.
Further repudiation of the Republican Party is not required.
- 8 votes
#9 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 3:43 PM ESTI agree - really a good point. US corporate taxes are some of the highest, but I'm pretty sure we have the biggest loopholes as well.
- 6 votes
I don't have the facts to grab right in front of me but I also read that the education levels of the Obama voters vs the McCain Palin voters was a big margin too.
- 3 votes
Here's one table indicating Democrats pull from the ends of the education scale and Republicans pull from the middle.
- 2 votes
So, the plan of the haters is to get some idiot out there to do something really stupid... I'm thinking of the girl who scratched up her face ay an ATM, blaming it on a black Obama supporter... I'm thinking of the guy with the gun, walking into a non-denominational church, known for its inclusion of gays...in the middle of the kids singing, 'Tomorrow, tomorrow, I love yah... You get the picture??
now, that's hate...inspired ignorance...
- 1 vote
I don't know about " right-wingers" but taxing my 401k will have a serious affect,if this happens then I stop putting money in my 401k and I will withdraw all funds ( with 10% early withdrawal penalty). That means less money in the market to be part of the government "give away money program". If the government keeps going down that path then I will pull all of my money out of the market and some one else , perhaps you can finance this socialism.
- 1 vote
#10 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 8:44 PM ESTCalifornia hit 10% unemployment on Friday. Hmmm... Let's see, the only way they can think to get out of budget and unemployment problems is to...
1) Tax the business and people more (already the highest in the country).
2) Do more liberal deficit spending on social programs that encourage more of the same in a downward sprial and keeps the illegal’s coming in to the state for freebee's (the most bankrupt liberal spending state in the country).
3) Prevent any off shore drilling that would improve their economy (already have the highest energy cost in the country yet are sitting on one of the largest offshore oil reserves in the world)
4) Have Pelosi get more pork and handouts paid for by the rest of us ....
Hmmm...This sounds like the plan Obama and the rest of the liberals have for our once great country...DO YOU SEE A PROBLEM HERE?
- 3 votes
#11 - Sun Mar 1, 2009 8:45 PM ESTAll I have to say is thank goodness for Ronald Reagan. I have to guess by your comments that many of you are not old enough to have experienced his Presidency and all you know is what you have read on your left-wing blogs. You could not have been there. If you had been around then you would know that Tip O'neal and the left-wingers controlled Congress. Reagan had a conservative majority in the U.S. Senate for two years. You are attributing many of these tax increases to what was a veto proof left-wing majority in the House. The House controlls the checkbook. Reagan was still able to reduce the income tax rates as well as corporate taxes. I never remember Reagan talking about what he inherited. However, it was double digits in unemployment, inflation,and interest rates. In spite of all that, before the end of his first term the U.S. economy was entering what became the longest peace time expansion we had ever experienced. American companies were exporting all over the planet. Sure you can name problems along the way. The deficits came from a left-wing Congress who for the first time in our history saw over $1 trillion in revenue come into the government coffers because people were starting businesses and making money, and Congress couldn't spend the revenues fast enough. It is true that Reagan spent a lot of money on our military, but Jimmy Carter had left it in shambles. This is how Bill Clinton benefited from the peace dividend. Thank goodness we got Ronald Reagan and not four more years of Jimmy Carter.
- 1 vote
I remember Reagan. One of the triumvirate of worst presidents ever (Reagan - Bush - Bush). Reagan was already in the onset of Alzheimer's during his first term. He cut taxes just once and then raised it primarily for the middle class. Reagan, along with that nut job, David Stockman, also started trickle down economics that created the super wealthy class and has driven the middle class towards bankruptcy.
- 7 votes
Prove the things I have stated to be wrong, not how you feel. So Jimmy Carter was a good President? So Ronald Reagan didn't inherit double digit inflation, unemployment, and interest rates? So we didn't have the longest peace time expansion we had ever experienced? All you can give me is the left-wing handbook on Reagan? So how do you know something that cannot be proven, that Reagan had the onset of Alzheimers his first term. The middle class prospered under Reagan. If you couldn't prosper under the Reagan years then all you have inside of you is complain. Show me how Reagan's economic policies have " driven the middle class towards bankruptcy" in 2009.
I remember Reagan. One of the triumvirate of worst presidents ever (Reagan - Bush - Bush). Reagan was already in the onset of Alzheimer's during his first term. He cut taxes just once and then raised it primarily for the middle class. Reagan, along with that nut job, David Stockman, also startedtrickle down economics that created the super wealthy class and has driven the middle class towards bankruptcy.
More left wing crock. Did not happen.
- 1 vote
space you know I really hope that you are willing to examine Reagan as a man and not as a diety.
- 2 votes
space you know I really hope that you are willing to examine Reagan as a man and not as a diety.
I am just disputing your tax increases that you attribute to Ronny. The 5 cent per gallon gas tax did happen, though the USA is still at the bottom of the ratio of gas taxes in the world so that did not bother me or anyone else as Ronny got rid of the Odd/Even gas rationing and opened up oil and gas drilling which helped to lower the price of gas by about 30% over two years, even with the gas tax increase.
Sorry but historical revisionism does not play with me.
- 2 votes
Deregulation started under Reagan and continued thru Bush, Clinton, Bush.
- 2 votes
No Deregulation started under Carter, Reagan just championed it.
- 2 votes
Deregulation started under Reagan and continued thru Bush, Clinton, Bush.
Deregulation did not cause this mess, the CRA and the forcing of banks to make loans to people who could not afford them was not affordable by the nation. The credit default swaps which are the achillies heel of the banks right now were never regulated and began under our dear leader Bill Clinton and his Treasury Toady Robert Reich.
- 1 vote
Credit default swaps were regulated until 1999, when Phil Gramm (repub) got legislation thru, which Bill Clinton signed into law.
- 2 votes
Credit default swaps were regulated until 1999, when Phil Gramm (repub) got legislation thru, which Bill Clinton signed into law.
Are you sure that they were regulated? Here is a good article on the subject.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123509667125829243.html
Mythbusting at work.
- 1 vote
I had heard the same thing that they've never been regulated, but the point is, regulation would have been nice on those as well as hedge funds.
- 1 vote
Space Guy,
Were the banks forced to make loans without verifiying income?
The mortage lenders made money by making loans, any loans, regardless of the quality of that loan. They attempted to hide/minimize their risk by bundling the mortgages and selling them. Then as mortage prices started declining the value of those assets on the books also declined, causing the mortgage portfolio holders to become insolvent.
The problem lays at the feet of the bankers and deregulation, not at the feet of the borrower who was told by the banker they trusted, they could afford the loan.
- 3 votes
The problem lays at the feet of the bankers and deregulation, not at the feet of the borrower who was told by the banker they trusted, they could afford the loan.
These loans were not called liar loans for nothing. Also, an old Ronnie Reagan aphorism is appropriate here, Trust, But Verify.
To think that people cede their personal responsibility for their own finances to someone that they "trust" is absurd.
- 2 votes
Whoa, hold on...
I agree with you space guy on the need for folks to take responsibility for their own fianances. It is absurd, but the problem is many don't have the education or access to information to make better financial decisions. Most people fail to remember banks are in business to make money for the shareholders, not the customers.
If you're interested in working with a financial institution who's purpose is to serve your interest, join a credit union. (see How to Find a Credit Union)
- 3 votes
It is absurd, but the problem is many don't have the education or access to information to make better financial decisions. Most people fail to remember banks are in business to make money for the shareholders, not the customers.
The most fundamental human responsibility is to get an education. I understand how crappy the education system is, but that does not remove that responsibility of an individual to learn what is necessary to control their own lives.
It is my opinion, that personal greed is at least part of the issue, as well as the systemic greed of the large institutions. I had a friend tell me during the boom that they treated their house "like a piggy bank", going back to refinance whenever they wanted some new toy. I know others that used the liar loans to buy multiple houses with the intention of flipping them. Hell there was even a program called "Flip this House" on the Home Garden TV network that was a popular program pushing the same thing.
I certainly agree about the credit union.
- 2 votes
Whoa space guy! Let's not put all people in the same basket. I agree there were some who were dishonest but there were some honest people who put their trust in the lenders. It's easy to say people can broaden their education but higher education isn't for everyone, and people do control their lives to the best of their abilities. Are you saying you're perfect and don't make mistakes. Are you saying you know everything there is to know about everything? Are you saying you put your trust in no one? Are you saying you've never put your trust in someone whose never let you down?
- 2 votes
I wonder how many people trusted their financial advisors or even the administrators of mutual funds? I wonder if all the people educated in finance had gains in their portfolio.
- 2 votes
try to remember...space guy is trying to get everybody OFF the planet...(paraphrased??)
- 1 vote
I agree there were some who were dishonest but there were some honest people who put their trust in the lenders. It's easy to say people can broaden their education but higher education isn't for everyone,
This has nothing to do with higher education, it is about common sense, that requires no government grants, nor time in college. It should have been absolutely obvious to anyone with an IQ above -10 that an interest only loan or a negative amortization loan was death. The same with a subprime mortgages.
- 1 vote
Answer me this space guy, if it's all about common sense, why did so many people lose so much money during the market crash?
- 2 votes
Answer me this space guy, if it's all about common sense, why did so many people lose so much money during the market crash?
Because in this generation, common sense has become increasingly less common.
- 1 vote
Because in this generation, common sense has become increasingly less common.
space guy, this is a statement I can agree with.
- 2 votes
John Stewart reviewed the (not so) intelligent financial recommendations over the last year or so last night:
Wed, March 4, 2009 CNBC Gives Financial Advice
- 2 votes
So Curious you simply refuse to listen to what the people from CNBC says, you just want to attack them. I can find a lot of BS from Obama just in the last several days.
- 1 vote
space guy,
If you even bothered to watch the clip, you'd have noticed many of those cited weren't associated with CNBC.
I wasn't attacking anyone, just pointing out the folly of much of the advice given out by 'experts' recently.
- 2 votes
If you even bothered to watch the clip, you'd have noticed many of those cited weren't associated with CNBC.
The president attacked CNBC and Jon Stewart followed it up like the Obama puppy he is. CNBC is far more listened to than what a lot of people understand and Cramer had a great rebuttal today (and he is a big Obama supporter who has financially supported the democrats big time).
- 1 vote
John Stewart... I can't believe you'd rather listen to cramer than John Stewart.... BTW, he's an equal opportunity humorist... Obama is not excluded from his humorous, witty criticisms..... It's the Daily News.....his worry about Obama getting it right, and keeping it real shows.....but there's just not a whole lot of new stuff on him...
conversely, it seems the GOPers don't have a clue.... In my own judgement, he does a good job of keeping a wary eye on the dangerous directions this party is prone to 'own'...
That Cramer guy is just frikkin weird....''Think fast and loose'', baby....buybuybuy...sellsellsell...great foot soldier for the brokerage industry....
Hmmmm.... Interesting... So far, both sides of the political fence are so busy fingers at each other that neither seem to realize that if you're going to state "facts" then it would perhaps be best to state that which also tends to lessen your platform as well.
1) Under the Carter admin we did see 18 % inflation rates. We also saw a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt.
2) Under the Reagan admin we saw a huge economic boom. We also saw the US evolve (devolve?) from being the largest lending nation on the planet to being the biggest debtor nation on the planet.
3) John McCain and Barack Obama are great politicians! (As far as politicians can be able to be "great" anythings.) If you fail to see the political polarization of the American public as anything other than insidiious and alarming then you fail to see how far BOTH party affiliations have be duped.
4) The lies and distortions of both parties are horrendous and unforgiveable. GW Bush was blamed for leading us into a recession when he was not even in office yet!! Obama is being accused by the NRA of being almost completely anti-gun when factcheck.org lays out exactly how this has been distorted and fabricated.
5) Muppet news flash, folks.... The current recession/depression was due. largely, from removing legislation that was put in place because of the Great Depression. (Mortgage securities being bought on margin, etc.) Both parties voted for their removal enthusiastically!! Just like George Carlin said, "When you hear anything about great bi-partisan efforts then you can be SURE that an extraordinary amount of skullduggery is being perpetrated on us."
6) I think Sting said it best when he said "There is no monopoly of common sense on either side of the political fence."
Folks, we're all Americans. We're SO much closer to each other than we can ever realize. Don't fall prey to the politics of division. We are the ones that will be conquered.
- 3 votes
#13 - Mon Mar 2, 2009 9:27 AM EST2) Under the Reagan admin we saw a huge economic boom. We also saw the US evolve (devolve?) from being the largest lending nation on the planet to being the biggest debtor nation on the planet.
Yep which began in the early 70's when we lost energy self sufficiency. The bleeding of the national wealth began then and was accelerated when the steel industry was raped by the enviros and moved offshore to China and other nations without the pollution controls of the U.S.. The same thing is about to happen with many other industries due to the Obama cap and trade scheme.
Sorry but the more you dispute, it the more you illustrate it.
- 1 vote
Can somebody tell me is there or isn't there a new energy tax on the docket.
Sorry Space guy, he's correct, Reagan borrowed and borrowed heavily to offset his tax cuts....
And I call BS about the Steel companies....they had the problem of the Japs dumping cheap steel in the USA, the steel companies asked for help and the Republicans said "Screw the Steel companies and screw the unions, same as they did to the textile industries in the Mid Atlantic. They were union and the Republicans refused to help them, now they are gone and the Japs have moved auto "assembly" plants in there.
For years it killed those cities, killed the south.....Now the Auto manufacturers are in trouble for the same problem and the Republicans are saying screw them too.....
- 3 votes
Boy, you're right - we are the ones that will be conquered. Maybe we better educate ourselves and pay attention.
- 2 votes
Sorry Space guy, he's correct, Reagan borrowed and borrowed heavily to offset his tax cuts....
Actually, the Reagan administration tried to cut the budget several times but each time the democratic controlled congress called the budget "dead on arrival". You can't control the budget when you don't control congress.
The steel companies died in the 70's not the 80's due to the democrats environmental regulation. While environmental regulation is a good thing, this was done in a capricious manner that made it easier to kill them than to give them time to retool. Now we have just moved the pollution offshore. China has been using this as an excuse for not cutting their carbon emissions.
- 1 vote
I see Orwell in Obama's policies, but more apt is Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". You ask who is John Galt? He certainly is not involved in Obamanomics.
#14 - Mon Mar 2, 2009 7:15 PM ESTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
