Gingrich claims Obama's already failed.

[oldoldman]

won't someone just come out and say that we have no fucking clue how the economy works and are left making baseless guesses about it in congress in order to gain votes from constituents that are equally arrogant and clueless.

It's like predicting the weather, only 4 years in advance. Let's not play the damn blame game, figure out what is wrong, and fucking fix it. Stop playing politics for 1 minute

If politicians didn't play politics they wouldn't be in office! Blame is the name of the game in DC. (I agree with you)

[Olo401]

What I was getting at was trying to determine who was "more to blame" in such a multifaceted issue would be an ill conceived method at best.

No it's not, it's very easy.

- Which party had legislative policy control for the greater part of the last 20 years? Think hard now..
- Which party for six of those years had unrestricted legislative and executive policy control, and for two more years had unfortunately compliant opposition to their policy control through moderate and conservative elements in the minority party?
- Which party took organized collective corruption to new heights, from to the dismissal of their party's legislative mouthpiece (named in the title of this thread) to the fabrication and execution of a very profitable war for its benefactors, spreading so far and wide in elected offices throughout the country that nearly every single level of government beyond municipal officials was touched?
- Which party constantly spins their policies through a filter of fear, hatred, fanatical religious fervor, and outright obvious falsehoods in order to propel their agenda? (Note I didn't say hypocrisy or double-talk, because both major parties in this country are guilty of that and it's unfortunately a natural part of politics)

[Olo401]

Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some legal and financial experts note that CRA regulated loans tend to be safe and profitable, and that subprime excesses came mainly from institutions not regulated by the CRA. In the February 2008 House hearing, law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton,[64][108] stated that a Federal Reserve survey showed that affected institutions considered CRA loans profitable and not overly risky. He noted that approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made "perhaps one in four" sub-prime loans, and that "the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight".[109] According to Janet L. Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, independent mortgage companies made risky "high-priced loans" at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts; most CRA loans were responsibly made, and were not the higher-priced loans that have contributed to the current crisis.[110] A 2008 study by Traiger & Hinckley LLP, a law firm that counsels financial institutions on CRA compliance, found that CRA regulated institutions were less likely to make subprime loans, and when they did the interest rates were lower.

Thank you for blaming poor people trying to get loans to improve their lives. I especially like how you ignored how profit-driven loan officers fudged the information these people provided to get them approved for non-CRA loans with variable rates, so they could collect the juicy commissions up front then jack up the interest to 15% or 25% whenever they felt like it to suck these folks pockets dry.

Oh yes, thanks for reading your source material. <3

[Demosthenes11]

yet you would be among the first to say the 90s economy was good because of clinton. the economy didn't start failing in the last 3 years

[Dimmauk]

When the Tech bubble bursted, the economy went to shit like it did recently?

[Demosthenes11]

I remember reading a book about politics for government a few years back that said legislation has shown to have almost 0 effect on the economy - and the effect it does have isn't seen for almost a decade. Might have been worldly philosophers? i forget ;<

[Olo401]

yet you would be among the first to say the 90s economy was good because of clinton. the economy didn't start failing in the last 3 years

Actually I'd say the 90s economy was good because of the Democratic Congress that was in place until 1994. When the Repulicans came to town in '95, there was a stalemate between the White House and the Congress - sure they managed to get through some of their little pet projects, but the jumping control of the Senate, government shutdowns and the fact that Clinton set the budgetary policy and prevented Gingrich/Armey or Hastert/Delay from getting anything too out of control in place. That combined with the tech boom kept the economy going at a steady pace. After Bush came to town there was no control in place anymore, tech & Enron blew up, but most importantly the Republicans had a majority in the Senate again. They could set the budgetary policy and just rubber stamp it, especially after 9/11 only provided more cover for them to do whatever they wanted to wreck the country's economy and line their pockets.

[Egon]

Ya'll didn't seem to care when all those hollywood type folks were talking bad about Bush.

[Kuya]

To make a quick and undetailed post. Though the Republicans have presented themselves as being the deregulation party, the Democrats have also partaken in it to a lesser extent, specifically in the Clinton administration. Take for example Steagall which was eliminated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

[Dimmauk]

Ya'll didn't seem to care when all those hollywood type folks were talking bad about Bush.

http://denas.files.wordpress.com/200...ie-chicks1.jpg

[Serif]

Ya'll didn't seem to care when all those hollywood type folks were talking bad about Bush.

You must be new here, us conservatives usually just let them squabble over this shit.

[Olo401]

Ya'll didn't seem to care when all those hollywood type folks were talking bad about Bush.

Did you? Dennis Miller, Daddy Yankee & Jon Voight are just itching to know..

I'm lower middle-class. It's just plain illogical to base my political opinions of Bush or Obama on what people with so much money that they're essentially free from its burden think.

[Senoska]

Yea, he sure did fail at bringing the economy back in the last what, 135 days?

http://i41.tinypic.com/hwfhac.jpg

wait, lol.

Spike when Obama came into office? Hmm.

[Tristam]

To make a quick and undetailed post. Though the Republicans have presented themselves as being the deregulation party, the Democrats have also partaken in it to a lesser extent, specifically in the Clinton administration. Take for example Steagall which was eliminated.

Glass-Steagall Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The did it in the Carter administration with the airlines too, it resulted in lower prices for consumers, but also the horrible working conditions faced by airline employees today.

[Delta_9]

Yea, he sure did fail at bringing the economy back in the last what, 135 days?

wait, lol.

Spike when Obama came into office? Hmm.

Yeah 30 companies are a totally accurate measure of how the economy is coming along.

[Demosthenes11]

Yea, he sure did fail at bringing the economy back in the last what, 135 days?

http://i41.tinypic.com/hwfhac.jpg

wait, lol.

Spike when Obama came into office? Hmm.

erm, there is no way Obama could have had any resounding effect on the economy in the time he has been in office. Policy takes a long time to be enacted, and most of the time years before significant changes can be seen.

[archibaldcrane]

The Dow Jones Industrial average is up about 10% since Obama took office - I'm not sure if Senoska is saying Obama's doing a good job based on the stock market, or sarcastically saying he's doing a good job based on the stock market, or saying he's doing a shitty job based on the stock market, or sarcastically saying he's doing a shitty job based on the stock market.

I think you may have achieved the mariana trench of sarchasms, Senoska, and for that I salute you.

erm, there is no way Obama could have had any resounding effect on the economy in the time he has been in office. Policy takes a long time to be enacted, and most of the time years before significant changes can be seen.

The economy? No. The stock market? Sure - it's a fickle mistress. This isn't to credit him at all, just saying that stocks move for very very stupid reasons in the short term, and new presidents are no exception, even if they haven't done anything to affect the economy at all.

[Olo401]

Yea, he sure did fail at bringing the economy back in the last what, 135 days?

http://i41.tinypic.com/hwfhac.jpg

wait, lol.

Spike when Obama came into office? Hmm.

Yeah 30 companies are a totally accurate measure of how the economy is coming along.

I actually agree with this statement - the S&P 500 is a much more accurate snapshot of the corporate side of the economy simply because it's so much more broad-based.

http://www.bluegartr.com/forum/attac...1&d=1244577700

[Dimmauk]

I'm sure it was just a coincidence then.

[Senoska]

http://i41.tinypic.com/hwfhac.jpg
http://i42.tinypic.com/dzxp44.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/eg68mb.jpg

This sure is hard.