Pay no attention to bladewire, he thinks anyone who doesn't agree with him and crockett must be a fake nick. He's just upset cause George Michael died today, bladewire lost his anal virginity while listening to Wham.

:thumbsup Was wondering why he's such an ass clown :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

^^ redhat fake nics talking to themselves ^^

Truly pathetic "human being" :1orglaugh

I think one thing that is pretty clear, at least to me, is that during Clinton's time in office the economy did very well because a little thing called The Internet suddenly appeared and created many jobs out of nowhere and it gave many others ways to make extra money in their spare time.

Bill, Newt, fucking Bilbo Baggins, it didn't really matter who was in charge so long as they sat by and let we nerds do our thing.

Right and wrong. You only have two parties because Americans only vote for two parties. Allowing big money to buy 1 out of 2 politicians in every seat. Because no one has the balls to not vote for those who aren't backed. Then when they don't do as told to by the voters, they drop them out of power.

Money only buys politicians it can only buy stupid voters. Vote Green, Socialists, communist and send a message to the billionaires that the USA isn't for sale.

The problem with US Healthcare is. It's in the hands of shareholders.

The rest of the Modern World provides better healthcare for far far less. The problem Obama had was getting Healthcare into the 21st Century. We've had 100% Free at the Point of use State Owned Healthcare in Europe since the mid-1900s.

Am I wrong?

It's not just America, it's Europe as well. In Europe, we are seeing the rise of the Nationalists political parties. When will America see that?

Imagine the jobless total without that extra borrowing.

If the money is spent in the US, it provides jobs, taxes and more jobs and taxes. Of course, you could always pay enough taxes to cover the costs to run a modern country. Let's face it you're willing to buy cheap Thrid World goods, constant migration from Third World Countries, that put Americans out of work. So why not pay the lower costs of Unemployment Benefits.

Again the real problem. Blinkered short sighted view of the political system. I'm sure Trump got a lot of votes by promising to cut taxes.

It's now hitting the lower middle classes. It has to be hitting many here as the main source of income from online porn is The West.

There's one for a start. Now promoting cheap stuff on non-porn sites.

Bill is guilty of creating a scheme where people who couldn't afford a mortgage got one. Those mortgages were then changing hands on the Markets for more than their face value.

He's also guilty of signing a trade deal that fucked America.

Bush is guilty of two unwinnable wars and allowing the markets to sell debt at more than the debt.

Obama is guilty of allowing the shareholders to keep over charging for healthcare. Guilty of going to more unwinnable wars. How much of those decisions rested on the two houses?

You fit the profile.. but maybe the hive mind thing is true. You conservatives all spew the exact same retarded shit from your right wing teleprompter, maybe it's just all of you are too dumb to think for yourself or maybe you are all fake nicks.. It's pretty much the same thing in mental capacity either way. :1orglaugh

According to 9.999 out of 10 GFY Republicans, anything Bill Clinton did except for Monica was the Republican Congresses doing. You do know who wrote that law you are taking about right? It has the two Republican's in Congress's name on it..

Crockett, you are 99% clueless about everything. Keep getting your information from Rachel Maddow instead of wikileaks so we can have further entertainment. :1orglaugh

The present World Trade/Migration/PoliticalModel is unsustainable.
 

The present World Trade/Migration/PoliticalModel is unsustainable.

In 20-30 years the jobs that are left in the First World will either be done by machines, low skilled/paid workers or a few high skilled/high paid workers. The taxes raised from wages will shrink to a level that'as unable to pay the costs of running a country. Especially one with very high unemployment.

Encouraging businesses to be in the First World will be pointless unless those companies are prepared to pay very high levels of taxes. They will be constantly minimising the workforce.

50% of the Wests population are of working age. Forget about whether they are in or out of work. They have to provide the tax revenues to pay for all the things we take for granted and 100,000s of jobs.

The big problem is can we afford to pay for all these people?

http://www.immigrationeis.org/sites/..._scenarios.gif

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images...t2010-2030.gif

There will be one class that will be far better off, that's the one's who buy our politicians.

Until we stop voting for people who will fuck us over. They will continue to fuck us over.

People who think that whoever gets into office will fuck us are cowards. We can vote them out every election unless they work for us.

Are you still too slow to get it?

What makes you think a Democrat controlled congress would have gone against Bill or that two Republican's in Congress wouldn't have written it?

Get your head out of your ass and stop thinking Democrats are the solution. They along with the Republicans are the problem. They're both owned by the same people.

In Europe, we're owned by bureaucrats similar problem.

Yes it fucking matters.. what happened as soon as Bush came into office. He took what was going to be used to finish balancing the national debt and handed out $500 checks then started two wars (1 was 100% avoidable) and bankrupted the economy. Then borrowed massive amounts of money for bail outs half of which he pushed into Obama's First year Budget.

Ahh look a brand new conservabro 1 topic in, shit posting like he's been here forever. Fake nick much or is it just the hive mind mentally ?

You mean like how Republican controlled Congress with Trump whom are about to spend this country into a black hole because we it seems we need "more" nukes.

Yep that's the important thing is having more nukes and building walls. Not supporting workers right or getting people healthcare.

Yes but in the US, the difference between out 2 parties is 1 party is full on war mongering God chanting lunatics. The other is not..

You will sit here rambling on how much Trump will save the US then soon as he start a fucking war, you will be bitching and crying about US war mongers.. You sit here trying to lecture us about us not having health care.. WHY the FUCK do you think we don't? It sure isn't Democrats whom have blocked it for 20+ years. Yet the next breath you whine about liberals telling us Republicans know what they're doing.. You have zero clue about US politics you just think you do..

Many people don't have jobs, or good jobs, because they are not worth employing. Sad but true ...

Let's mothball all the street cleaning machines and give the unemployed a broom and a job like North Korea does:2 cents:

The mortgage "scheme" wasn't really a thing. It was just an excuse. Most people forget that what happened first is George Soros pulled his entire portfolio out of the money markets which is what triggered runs on the banks and that is what started the collapse. He did this to propel Obama into office. And then banker bets (cdo's) are what really finished the market off.

Your red hat is too tight.

You go from blaming Clinton for end times to George Soros for the housing collapse caused by Bush. You're really on point with your alt-white talking points.

Yes we know, all the damage done by Donald will be the fault of Obama & Clinton.

You say that as if Obama hasn't started 2 wars while in office.

Money Market Mayhem: The Reserve Fund Meltdown | Investopedia

FACT George Soros controlled the World's largest money market fund up until that point. The day of the money market crash "someone" removed hundreds of billions from the market.

Still doesn't get it.

Democrats can't get elected because Americans are unwilling to pay what it costs to run their own country and ensure the economic future of America.

Trump has shown you what you can do by voting out both parties. He promised to cut migration and bring jobs back.

Look at Barry's comment to show you the problem. Will he pay a lot more taxes to improve education, pay benefits and employ all those street cleaners?

No, he won't even buy a phone made in the US by an American because it costs too much.

If we want politicians to do what's best for us. They have to fear us. And guns won't do that. Votes will. Hillary has no fear of us what so ever.

If Trump had stood up and said the new Military budget will cost each of you $xzy. He would have lost. Instead he came up with a fanciful scheme where it costs nothing and he can cut taxes.

In Europe that would have made him a laughing stock.

The companies moving to the Third World are employing Third World managers. Who then build their own companies. Soon your Western Market will be so reduced, you will need a broom.

How many sales do you get from the Third World?

George Soros pulled his money because he's bright enough to realise that buying/selling $100,000 debt bonds that would never be paid. Wasn't worth touching.

Or do you believe if he had kept his money in, nothing would have gone wrong?

Investopedia

Investopedia is your source of FACT?

Investopedia?

George Soros has made his living terrorizing the system. He is in fact the cause of it. He removed his fund from the market, caused the collapse and created a run on the banks which put the banks at risk. Since he caused the problem he obviously knew where to profit Soros among firms that made money in 2008, 2009 - MarketWatch

There has not been any wars during the Obama Administration. Only congress can declare war and it has not done so during the Obama Administration. Engaging a small number of troops is not a war by any measure.

Fact. That's what a clever broker does when the bonds being bought or sold are worth shit.

Think of shares as if they're money. The value of a $1 bill is worth $1 at the time of use. So if someone pulls billions, he can't "pull" anything. They're still worth billions.

If however someone is buying/selling $1 of unpayable debt @$1.50. There's a problem if someone says "We're selling $1 of unpayable debt @$1.50 and in reality, it's not worth shit. " There's a huge problem.

Look back to all the big market crashes to see how it works. East India Company, Daffodils, 1930s Crash. And there's more and more to show how it works.

Some played the market up till the final days, making billions. Some missed the get out day and lost billions.

The problem is if the West stops this casino gambling. All our GDPs go crashing. We no longer have enough industries in the Industrial World to pay for the services we demand.

What do you have? ABC told me blah blah blah? Borrowers that can't afford to pay? I use to co-own a mortgage brokerage so I do know a few things about that. If someone was getting a "no doc or stated income" loan it means they had a really high credit score otherwise they wouldn't even be offered it. And even then the term "no doc or stated income" is silly. These would generally be self-employed people who had to provide more documents than a W-2'ed person such as bank statements for 2-3 years, income tax returns etc, etc. Truth be told they were always the better borrower because they had flexibility in their income over a fixed income.

My God Paul you do NOT know American politics. Let me teach you.

Obama needed the house & Senate support to changes after the price gouging happened. At that point it was a Republican controlled Senate & House, aka congress.

The Republican congress wanted Obamacare to fail, they didn't give a shit about the American people (they still dont), so they refused to vote on bill after bill that came in to reform the pricing and cost of drugs. Pharma owns Republican congressmen.

It wasn't within Obama's power alone to control pricing and Republican congress allowed people to get fucked.

You're confusing the money market with the buying and selling of CDO's and or the bets for or against them. Because Soros collapsed the money market causing bank runs the banks couldn't service those CDO's.

Are you suggesting he should have left his money where it was and lost it?

Or, that the markets would never have collapsed because buying/selling those bonds was good business.

I agree that people like Soros have far too much influence on economies. This will tell you why.

http://www.statista.com/graphic/5/24...y-industry.jpg

http://www.rpsoft2000.com/consulting...01950-2009.jpg

The change, the second image shows, happened under both parties. Who do you think benefitted the most out the selling of American Jobs?

Those old enough will remember the American Dream of the 60/70s.

Read my last sentence again. I know he was blocked at all turns. The problem is not going to the voters spelling out what's happening. Or the voters too dumb to realise.

Most US politicians are owned. I now expect you to find a couple who are totally self-financed.

Even Soros's money would have been unable to service the CDO's. They were over priced. If he had left all his money in. The debt would have been lower. He would have been broke along with a few others. If there had been no run on the banks. The entire collapse would have come later and cost us far more.

I think you should study how these markets work.

A $ is only worth a $ if someone is willing to give you a $'s worth of value for it. So when people start selling a $ for $1.50 and the $ is only a piece of paper saying "I promise to pay the bearer a $". someone will eventually catch on that they're paying $1.50 for a piece of paper.

Soros's money wouldn't have stopped it.

Financial Crisis Cost Tops $22 Trillion, GAO Says

The markets were so over inflated a crash was inevitable. 200/2009. They couldn't keep selling debts that would never be paid on houses that were overpriced. The culture in the Banking industry at the time led to other stocks and shares being over priced. Especially stocks and shares in the Banks playing the markets.

Do more research. Because the next one is on it's way.

Right, I wish you well too -- unemployable one.

Just don't get it, do you ... Talented people with today's skills have todays good jobs. In twenty years there will be new job titles and only the able will have those jobs. And many people will still be whining ...

Lots of people are making money in the Western World and will be making money in the future -- because they know how to.

Paul don't wiggle out of your stance by doing a double take in your last sentence.

You blamed Obama for not lowering prices, I taught you how it's not in his control even though he tried with many bills congress refused to pass. You are wrong about Obama controlling drug prices, end of story no big deal.

Just as a point of clarity. Bill Clinton had nothing to do with creating the law that gave mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. That program had been around since the 70's and it had worked great for 20+ years. The law said that companies who gave out mortgages had to give a small number of mortgages to underqualified buyers. These were the subprime mortgages etc. It worked because the banks were careful with who they picked to give these mortgages to because if the person defaulted on it that bank (and likely that specific branch of the bank) would have to deal with it and it is a pain in the ass. So, they picked candidates carefully and had a very low default rate.

Clinton signed into a law a bill that deregulated the banks and allowed savings and loan style banks to sell investment products just like investment banks. Before this was not allowed to happen. Suddenly, the savings and loan banks realized they had something of real value, these mortgages, and investors wanted them so they started selling them like crazy. When they ran out, they wanted more so they used the law that allowed them to hand out subprime mortgages to hand out tons of them then turn around and resell them to others often within 48 hours of the papers being signed.

The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton's presidency.

Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits.

These new HUD rules lowered down payments from the traditional 20 percent to 3 percent by 1995 and zero down-payments by 2000. What's more, in the Clinton push to issue home loans to lower income borrowers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made a common practice to virtually end credit documentation, low credit scores were disregarded, and income and job history was also thrown aside. The phrase "subprime" became commonplace. What an understatement.

Next, the Clinton administration's rules ordered the taxpayer-backed Fannie and Freddie to expand their quotas of risky loans from 30 percent of portfolio to 50 percent as part of a big push to expand home ownership.

Fannie and Freddie were securitizing these home loans and offering 100 percent taxpayer guarantees of repayment. So now taxpayers were on the hook for these risky, low down-payment loans.

Tragically, when prices fell, lower-income folks who really could not afford these mortgages under normal credit standards, suffered massive foreclosures and personal bankruptcies. So many will never get credit again. It's a perfect example of liberals using government allegedly to help the poor, but the ultimate consequences were disastrous for them.

Additionally, ultra-easy money from the Fed also played a key role. Rates were held too low for too long in 2002-2005, which created asset price bubbles in housing, commodities, gold, oil, and elsewhere. When the Fed finally tightened, prices collapsed. So did mortgage collateral (homes) and mortgage bonds that depended on the collateral.

Many bond packages were written to please Fannie and Freddie, based on the fantastical idea that home prices would never fall. Fannie and Freddie, by the way, cost the taxpayers $187 billion.

Just to make this story worse, Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama voted to filibuster a Republican effort to roll back Fannie and Freddie. But on top of all this, while Hillary was propping up Fannie and Freddie, she was taking contributions from their foundations.

^^ redhat triggered meltdown complete ^^

Are you really this dumb? Democrat's "can't get elected". Umm Hello.. Bill Clinton won by a landslide. Obama won by a landslide.. Why? Because they were popular with the voters..

Al Gore won the popular vote. Hillary won the popular vote the only Democrat since the fucking 80's not to win the popular vote was Kerry. You literally have no fucking idea what dumb shit you are spewing.


Popular vote = the number of people voting meaning since the 80's Democrats have only lost the people's vote 1 fucking time. That means since the 80's Democrats have won the majority vote every damn election except 1. That's nearly 30 fucking years of win.. :error:error:error

Now lets look at what all 3 of these had in common. Gore, Kerry & Clinton. None of them were break always or really energized the people. They were just average compared to candidates like Bill Clinton or Obama. That is the reason they lost.

The DNC handed the election to Trump when they decided to fuck over Sanders who you guessed it "energized" the people. Sanders would have fucking curb stomped Trump. He was neck and neck with Hillary even with the DNC fucking him at every turn..

The only reason Trump is now the POTUS is because the DNC tried to push a unwanted candidate, not because they "couldn't win". They could've won but failed to realize how bad of a choice Hillary was. Trump didn't win because he was good, he won because Hillary was that bad..

You seriously have no clue about US politics.

I never said Clinton shared no blame in this. I was simply clarifying that Clinton didn't create the program that forced mortgage lenders to give mortgages to underqualified buyers. The actual program that put these subprime mortgages in play and got lower income people buying houses started in the 70's then increased some in the 80's. Clinton then made it even easier to give these loans out. Add in a little deregulation that can turn those mortgages into a product that can be bought and sold on the open market and you have a recipe for disaster.

All your bright young things will compete with Chinese workers and companies.

Assuming billionaires will create well-paying jobs in the West. Displays a level of naivety that beggars belief. Especially from a man who creates jobs overseas for lower paid workers than girls in the US.

If the Internet was restricted to only the country the consumer was in. You would be hiring Americans for American consumers. British for British consumers. Your French girls must do best in French-speaking countries.

The skills level is irrelevant. Chinese Nuclear Scientists compete with US/British Nuclear Scientists. And that goes right down to importing toilet cleaners from the Third World to work cheaper the Western ones.

So it was Clinton.

Clinton basically put a few things into motion that allowed several bad things to finally get together. Then Bush got into the White House and found the economy lagging to he dropped interest rates to the floor which spurred the housing industry and allowed banks to basically hand out subprime mortgages that had introductory rates that were very low. Of course, five years later, when the rates had gone back up some and the rates of those mortgages changed a lot of people found their house payments doubling and even tripling and everything crashed and burned.

So Clinton got the ball rolling then Bush kicked it into the goal.

Then why don't they dominate the two houses? Who were able to block Obama and would have blocked Clinton. How many Reps vs Dems politicians are there in the two houses? One minute you tell me the Republicans kept blocking Obama, now you imply they aren't getting elected because Democrats win by a landslide. Make up your mind.

I understand the thing about Hillary being the worse candidate possible. She barely beat Trump in the popular vote and if that was what decided the result. Both would have campaigned differently.

You seriously have no clue about US politics. :1orglaugh

It's the Governments job to regulate these gamblers. Not hand them the tools to bankrupt us. The problem is the money they donate and the need for some sort of industry to keep GDP and the economy from tanking.

Nice to see you agree with me that it was Clinton's fault.

Now let's discuss his other big fuck up. The Trade Deals that signed away the jobs of those workers who he gave mortgages to.