American Elections 2010 Edition

[falling_raindrops]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

In a terrible recession (created by the left giving out mortgages to people who couldn't afford them ).

The recession was indeed caused by people abusing the existance of credit, but as far as I am aware, that is not something that can be blamed on a single political party.

I don't remember any democrat party candidates pushing legislation enabling this, so I'm confused as to why you claimed that it was their fault.

[Asura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

Obama also continued the war in Afghanistan when people really don't want it anymore and that includes many conservatives. The people aren't into the "nation building thing" that the wars deviated into. Afghanistan was a smart war as it began but it should have ended a long time ago outside of occasional "policing" Al Qaeda camps etc. Obama doesn't even care about the wars and didn't even meet with the generals in his first six months in office. Obama's war (for him) is on America itself and its capitalist foundations.

The war should be on capitalism. The escalation of our involvement in the Middle East was (is?) a joke, one for which Obama can't be blamed...

[Isoverity]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buttons.

^ I'll come back to this when my head isn't splitting, but I just wanted to say that I'm impressed with your Marxist knowledge :)

Hope your head is better.

I was a grad student and teaching assistant in a history department with Marxists in it. They converted one of my best friends who is now a Marxist professor. My town was also home to a lot of communists. One local wrote "Ten Days That Shook The World" in 1919 and is the only American buried in the Kremlin. We also had a national scandal with riots between veterans and communists in 1947.

Many of the communists in New York city used to live or vacation around here. A lot of people still brag about being "red diaper babies" who were born into communist families (who were communal here). When Obama writes about his radical friends in college I had a lot of the same kind so I can identify with what he describes in his books. I never had red diapers though.

[Isoverity]

Quote:

Originally Posted by falling_raindrops

The recession was indeed caused by people abusing the existance of credit, but as far as I am aware, that is not something that can be blamed on a single political party.

I don't remember any democrat party candidates pushing legislation enabling this, so I'm confused as to why you claimed that it was their fault.

The central problem in the collapse of the economy was the subprime mortgage sector. The government under President Clinton made changes to banking regulations (called CRA or Community Reinvestment Act) that pushed banks to lend to people who had bad credit or no credit. Banks used to lend money based on financial principles but the new Clinton regulations psuhed banks to lend for social reasons. The mortgage industry became a private/public type of venture.

As time went on, people with bad credit didn't default as much as banks feared and so they lent more and more money to people with poor credit. They began to lend with "no money down" . These mortgages were securitised or insured and then sold as investments that were packaged and repackaged as they moved around between investors. Pretty soon the computers weren't even keeping proper track of investments and nobody realised this until after the collapse.


Around 2003 Republicans and Prez Bush felt the two federal entities that owned 40% of US mortgages were allowing increasingly risky loans. The Democrats who controlled the congressional committees who had oversight of the two entities fought against the reforms. Barney Frank in particular resisted any refoms

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

After the collapse of the mortgage sector Frank blamed Republicans for not reforming problems.

Lots of people had a hand in the problems but the changes to CRA under Clinton opened Pandora's box and Democrat legislators turned a business into a socialist housing program that collapsed after they fought against reforms

[falling_raindrops]

Okay, that makes a lot more sense, I wasn't aware of the Clinton legislation and was confused throughout a lot of discussions of this topic as to what allowed the problem to start, and you helped clear that up for me. Thanks!

[Buttons.]

I thought I'd come back to this now as my friend and I had a chat about some of the issues:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

The Democrat party has become a socialist/ Marxist party with too many ties to foreign elements that are anti-American (like George Soros). People know Obama is a Marxist, anti-American despite his facade. His goose is cooked. Which just means he will be even more radical and divisive. The smart people saw this coming.

there are a fair few loopholes in McCain Feingold that are exploited by the Republicans and the Democrats. I don't think Obama,an American citizen, is Anti-American I just think he is more of an internationalist who realises that putting America first and ignoring the rest of the world in terms of poverty and debt relief isn't the best option for humanity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

The government also kept competition away and nobody can shop for insurance from state to state. I could buy health insurance in Texas for 75 quid a month while in New York I have to pay 300 (its higher because there are more people using more services).

Driving premiums down in a bidding war would decrease payouts in the long run and reduce the breadth of coverage insurers could provide.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

The new health-care bill does nothing to fix the problems that created higher costs and it set the government on a financial path the non-partisan CBO (Congressional Budget Office) called unsustainable. The people who benefit from new health-care are unions who A) won't have to pay insurance costs anymore - and B) will gain thousands of new jobs and members. Health-care was more a gift to the unions than anything else. The bill absolutely killed the job market at the worst time. A drowning man was thrown a bag of bricks.

Why should unions pay for health insurance? employers should cover it. hang on, it created jobs for unions and killed the job market? not sure that makes sense. I agree there is an issue for small businesses when they need to cover health insurance costs which can be difficult on start up but if you don't have national free healthcare then this is always going to be an issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

It was in this dysfunctional environment that Obama got elected. It wa easy to see that Obama was a radical who said he didn't even like the Constitution (which hardly anybody has read) because it didn't make government transfer wealth.

do you mean wealth transference to third world countries as in debt relief or in terms of higher taxes on the rich to subsidise the poor? either way- I think he has a point. the constitution doesn't cover such things because of the time it was written which in some ways holds the US back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

Then as soon as Obama takes offices he passes a trillion dollar "stimulus" bill that didn't stimulate anything except unions and other elements of Obama's base. 350 billion was just wealth transfers to social programs.

Again- wealth transfer to social programmes, as in those that help people in need? Again I fail to see the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

Of course foreign diplomacy/national security is also a disaster but thats another story

Foreign diplomacy like with the middle east? I think the Bush administration pretty much destroyed that and Obama has a lot of work to do to even start to rebuild them. I think Obama is a very skilled diplomat to be honest. I also don't think there is a major issue with national security.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

No Obama is not a classical Marxist. That actually went out of style a long time ago. Marxism was "re-theorized" by Antonio Gramsci (Italian communist who died in the 1930's) and the Frankfurt School (began in Germany but moved to Columbia university in NY when Nazis took over). Neo-Marxism seeks to create a new proletariat using fringe groups within a society to militate against the core of society and its values. Black liberation neo-Marxists such as Obama's minister like Mao over Marx because they find Marx to white and European and prefer developing world, non-European Marxists.

I don't think Obama is a black Marxist because I think his race is incidental. He isn't militant he just sympathises more with the developing world than, oh I don't know, the Republicans.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

"Anti-American" in Obama's case means subverting the economy on purpose - and collapsing defenses on purpose . In a terrible recession (created by the left giving out mortgages to people who couldn't afford them ) Obama declared war on business and the private sector. He defamed bankers, insurance companies, manufacturers etc. and sent a chill through markets. He robbed creditors of their legal due in car maker bankruptcies and gave the money to the unions that are his voting block.

Subverting the economy on purpose or not agreeing with the neo-con view of how to fix it? The left giving out mortgages? Companies like Lehman Brothers aren't exactly known for the left wing policies or benevolence to the poor. They're out to make money. How did he defame bankers? By having a go at them for falsely packaging subprime mortgages as prime one's and selling them around the world knowing that when the companies werent able to recoup the mortgages they'd be make a massive loss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

The central problem in the collapse of the economy was the subprime mortgage sector. The government under President Clinton made changes to banking regulations (called CRA or Community Reinvestment Act) that pushed banks to lend to people who had bad credit or no credit. Banks used to lend money based on financial principles but the new Clinton regulations psuhed banks to lend for social reasons. The mortgage industry became a private/public type of venture.

These mortgages were securitised or insured and then sold as investments that were packaged and repackaged as they moved around between investors. Pretty soon the computers weren't even keeping proper track of investments and nobody realised this until after the collapse.

So, as you seem to realise, the problem was the repackaging of the mortgages under false pretences not the actual lending in the subprime sector. Companies in the US took calculates risks by lending in the subprime sector but they didn't give overseas banks the same courtesy by accurately describing the mortgages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

Around 2003 Republicans and Prez Bush felt the two federal entities that owned 40% of US mortgages were allowing increasingly risky loans. The Democrats who controlled the congressional committees who had oversight of the two entities fought against the reforms. Barney Frank in particular resisted any refoms

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

After the collapse of the mortgage sector Frank blamed Republicans for not reforming problems.

Lots of people had a hand in the problems but the changes to CRA under Clinton opened Pandora's box and Democrat legislators turned a business into a socialist housing program that collapsed after they fought against reforms

EVERYONE who predicted the global financial crisis was labelled a scare-monger by the right and the left- that's the nature of boom and bust- people don't want to think the good times will ever end.