wages are down

[uscitizen]

The rich retards have the benefit of a FED bailout when they should just sink.

And getting tax cuts for helping to rape the country.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The rich retards have the benefit of a FED bailout when they should just sink.

Nothing pisses me off more than what the Fed did on Friday. I agree completely that they should have let the bastards drown.

 

[uscitizen]

Nothing pisses me off more than what the Fed did on Friday. I agree completely that they should have let the bastards drown.

yeah like the S&L bailout.

didn't that cost every taxpayer like 4k or something ?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

yeah like the S&L bailout.

didn't that cost every taxpayer like 4k or something ?

except they are being sneaky about this. Note, when the fed "injects" money into the financial markets, they get securities from the bank in exchange. Anyone want to take a bet on what those securities are?

My guess.... sub-prime debt.... the government can hide the losses a lot better than the banks.

 

[Cancel7]

except they are being sneaky about this. Note, when the fed "injects" money into the financial markets, they get securities from the bank in exchange. Anyone want to take a bet on what those securities are?

My guess.... sub-prime debt.... the government can hide the losses a lot better than the banks.

So that "injection" of billions was actually a bail out for the lenders? And the individuals who are going to go into foreclosure, they are not going to get bailed huh?

 

[Cancel7]

Move over darlin, here comes old and decrepit!

Hi froggie, it is sooo good to see you.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

So that "injection" of billions was actually a bail out for the lenders? And the individuals who are going to go into foreclosure, they are not going to get bailed huh?

Don't know for sure, because they never tell us. But my guess is that is what they did.

As for the individuals, $100mm has been set aside to help those that the government feels were victims of predatory lending. I disagree with this as well.

 

[Cancel7]

Don't know for sure, because they never tell us. But my guess is that is what they did.

As for the individuals, $100mm has been set aside to help those that the government feels were victims of predatory lending. I disagree with this as well.

100 million isn't going to go very far though, it's kind of a joke compared to what the lenders will get. This is a good example, in case any Republicans are wondering, of why people like me want to choke when we hear national repubs saying they are for "personal responsibility" because this is just one more example, among many, of who they consider personal responsibility to be for. And it's not them, nor their rich friends.

 

[uscitizen]

Don't know for sure, because they never tell us. But my guess is that is what they did.

As for the individuals, $100mm has been set aside to help those that the government feels were victims of predatory lending. I disagree with this as well.

Well they do have some party contributors they will have to bail out.

 

[Damocles]

I wonder why walmart sales are slipping ,people cant afford medical insurance, bankruptcies are up and food ,gas are on the rise.

I know ,Iknow its because everything is going so well right?

Gas prices are currently falling.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I have said since Politics.com that the global economy and free trade had but one outcome for the USA. We would go down and most of the rest of the world would go up.
Got greif and ridicule from all cons on this stance.

The golden age of the USA has passed it's peak.

US, free trade is mutually, not parasitically, beneficial. If we weren't trading with other nations we'd be falling. BTW, we aren't falling.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Gas prices are currently falling.

The sky is currently falling.

 

[doniston]

The sky is currently falling.

That is very true, unfortunately there are very few that see it droppong.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

That is very true, unfortunately there are very few that see it droppong.

HEH HEH

(A quote)

 

[Topspin]

Several mortgage companies have already gone belly up. And rightfully soo, more bankers need to be kicked between the balls. We all know the little guy dumbass with the big mortgage he can't pay will get foreclosed on.

 

[uscitizen]

and the big dumbasses that can't pay their mortgage will get bailed out, it is the American way.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

100 million isn't going to go very far though, it's kind of a joke compared to what the lenders will get. This is a good example, in case any Republicans are wondering, of why people like me want to choke when we hear national repubs saying they are for "personal responsibility" because this is just one more example, among many, of who they consider personal responsibility to be for. And it's not them, nor their rich friends.

It depends on how they use it. If they are idiots (which is likely) they will try something stupid like paying peoples mortgage payments to try to get them caught up. If they are intelligent (highly unlikely for politicians) they will refinance the loans at affordable rates and make the individuals continue making payment.

This has little to do with the Rep vs. Dem argument. This is the typical idiotic response of politicians that do not understand the situation and give in to the fear and start hitting the panic buttons. While the Fed is "independent" of the politicians I will bet my portfolio that both parties were pressuring the Fed to do something. After meeting with Bernanke and Paulson today, Dodd came on to CNBC and started hinting that the Fed should do more by using all the tools at their disposal. Like a typical politician he hedged it by saying he was not trying to tell them what to do, but that was under the "impression" that the Fed would use all the tools available to him. Which the market immediately translated to mean the Fed was considering cutting the Fed Funds rate.... maybe even sooner than the September meeting.

Note: Please do not take this as an attack on Dodd or the Dems... it is not... I think the Chair of the Senate finance committee would have responded in the same manner no matter who was in the seat at the time.... because politicians that actually understand economics are hard to find. Hence 46 straight fiscal years of increasing our nations debt.

 

[uscitizen]

Umm I thought we had a balanced budget there for a year ? Just another myth ?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Umm I thought we had a balanced budget there for a year ? Just another myth ?

For the LOVE OF GOD... LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A BUDGET AND ACTUAL RESULTS.

Anyone can have a BALANCED BUDGET... but you have to actually STICK to the budget to make it coincide with the actual results. In a BUDGET you project what you think your revenues and expenses are going to be. As you review the results during the year, you have to adjust your budget if those numbers are coming in high or low.

2000 they came real damn close to reducing the debt (they only increased it by $18-19billion.) This is looking at the fiscal year. If you look at the calendar year, then they had a surplus in 2000. Most economists are going to look at fiscal year-over-year so that numbers are comparable from one period to another.... and so politicians don't cherry pick results.

 

[cawacko]

Umm I thought we had a balanced budget there for a year ? Just another myth ?

Going on the assumption that you understand the difference between a federal budget and the national debt would you mind showing us a year that the national debt did not increase?

I'll give you the answer that there isn't one because the national debt has increased each year. However if you believe you can find one I'll be right here to say you are correct and I am wrong.