Mean Street

[BDashe 0]

A concise op ed on how the real world works, regardless of what politicians want you to think. the author is saying Americans nowadays need to blame someone else for downturns or misfortune which is why we self destruct. More often than not it is the democratic party that points the finger away from the citizen or D.C. and targets corporate America. I think the closing line is pure genius:

After all, “It’s Actually Your Fault, America” is not a good slogan for a re-election campaign.



http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/01/21/mean-street-obama-is-killing-america-by-killing-wall-street/

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[quade 4]

Except it's only half true.

While John Q. Public did in fact take out loans they could not afford to pay, Gordon Gekko was hiring physicists to figure out how to sell those loans to other banks and gamble on whether or not they'd go belly up which lead to a bigger demand by the banks for more unsupportable loans to people that couldn't afford them on a good day.

There's plenty of blame to go around.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,120]

>More often than not it is the democratic party that points the finger away
>from the citizen or D.C. and targets corporate America.

We ARE corporate america (and DC, and the unions, and the military, and the banks, and the christians, and the democrats.) Pointing the finger at "regular people" and not corporations is as foolish as pointing the finger at any other group. It's our fault, and "us" includes everyone, not just the groups you dislike.

It is especially ironic that a post about not pointing fingers is pointing the finger at Democrats.

[Squeak 17]

When we had the economic crash in the 80's our the Treasurer stated
"This is the recession we had to have"


That went over well

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

It is especially ironic that a post about not pointing fingers is pointing the finger at Democrats.

Of course - after all, EVERYONE knows that it's all the Republican's fault.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>Of course - after all, EVERYONE knows that it's all the Republican's fault.

Irony x2.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Of course - after all, EVERYONE knows that it's all the Republican's fault.

Irony x2.

I'm sorry - was there some OTHER point you wanted to make when you said it was ironic that the story was pointing fingers at the Dems?

I must have missed Boehner's announcement today recommending penalty taxes on business - can you point it out to me?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>I'm sorry - was there some OTHER point you wanted to make when you
>said it was ironic that the story was pointing fingers at the Dems?

That wasn't the point I was trying to make at all. Which is why your post was ironic.

>I must have missed Boehner's announcement today recommending
>penalty taxes on business - can you point it out to me?

Irony x3. This article could have been written about your posts.

[BDashe 0]

Quote

It is especially ironic that a post about not pointing fingers is pointing the finger at Democrats.

Uhhhh, I'm saying it's mostly our own fault collectively, not the dems fault. I am also saying that since our society does not like to bear responsibility for bad things, the dems get off on blaming rich people for all the worlds problems and gain votes/popularity through scapegoats and promises to give away free money to the largest voting populations.

Sure there was irresponsible lending, some blame needs to be placed there as no one is entirely innocent. I am still of the opinion that ultimately we are responsible for our own actions, so more blame is on idiot america. Further, it is the dems that push for less restrictions on lending, so the "less fortunate" can afford a bigger home... then when the defaults start piling up the very same dems turn around and blame the banks when people can't be responsible for themselves.

Obama has been on the record recently trying to get banks to lend more money a year after he chastised them for lending too much money to too many people. Comically, he is now trying to pass legislation on proprietary trading in the name of 'banking reform' which has absolutely nothing to do with the financial collapse of recent.

A simple rule would have prevented this whole mess: don't buy shit you cant afford, and if it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[billvon 3,120]

>I'm saying it's mostly our own fault collectively, not the dems fault.

OK, agreed.

>the dems get off on . . .
>Further, it is the dems that push for less restrictions on lending . .

Sure sounds like you have to get that finger pointed right back at the democrats. Which sounds a lot like the people mentioned in the article who have to blame someone, so they blame Wall Street.

As an example, this makes just as much sense:

==========================
Apparently, this is now how we treat political success in America. We damn it, and then we punish it by spend all our efforts trying to destroy the very government we elected.

Why is our country so self-destructive?

We need people to come together, but we engage in political divisiveness. We need millions of jobs, but we kill the incentives and destroy the programs that will create them.

Please don’t accuse me of not “getting it.” I do “get it.” I “get” that Obama isn't all that popular. I “get” that government screws up. I “ get” that they spend too much, and I “get” that politicians should be held accountable.

But does anyone actually believe the GOP "war on Obama" will remedy any of that? I know I don’t.

This war is about politics. It’s about a party out of power desperate to get back into power. It’s about pushing the blame for the nation’s misery from bad economic decisions by lenders and borrowers back to Washington.

Unfortunately, this is a fight — that at least on the PR front — Wall Street is already winning. Just read today’s fiery editorials in all the conservative blogs, and witness the stock market slump caused by these very same companies.

This crisis was caused by banks lending money to millions of Americans to buy houses they couldn’t afford, and then covering those loans with ever more risky and opaque debt instruments. You won’t hear much of that coming from the GOP. After all, “Deregulation doesn't always work, sorry about that” is not a good slogan for a re-election campaign.
=================

But I have a feeling you wouldn't be posting that.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>I'm saying it's mostly our own fault collectively, not the dems fault.

OK, agreed.

At the same time, those in charge said, "All looks good to me." They did nothing as hyperinflation set in, taxes were cut and we went off to a fabricated war that has cost > 1T to this point. That, to me, is the real problem.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

A concise op ed on how the real world works, regardless of what politicians want you to think. the author is saying Americans nowadays need to blame someone else for downturns or misfortune which is why we self destruct. More often than not it is the democratic party that points the finger away from the citizen or D.C. and targets corporate America. I think the closing line is pure genius:

After all, “It’s Actually Your Fault, America” is not a good slogan for a re-election campaign.



http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/01/21/mean-street-obama-is-killing-america-by-killing-wall-street/

I don't buy that at all. In a negotiation on financing a house purchase between, say, a carpenter who may do it twice in his life, and a banker who does it every day, it's the banker who deserves the bulk of the blame when it all goes south. And a system set up by bankers to allow bankers to make shaky loans over and over gain and shove the risk onto someone else is not the fault of the homebuyer.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[BDashe 0]

very cute bill.

I'm not sure how this is so hard for you to understand. I'm not saying the dems are guilty of the financial crisis. I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats (the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

You do realize the version of the article you altered could be considered socialist bordering on communist. It is certainly a far cry from our country's founding principals. I think since the majority of americans felt we were headed in the socialist direction where we have no voice, the following is explained:

My turn to get cute-

Hey, you remember that time when one of the most liberal states with a 25%+ margin of victory in the general election and with only 18% registered repubs voted for a republican senator in a seat that was held by the liberal "lion" for decades at a job no republican had held for decades? It happened right before the passing of a liberal legistlative cornerstone policy was to be passed on a party line divided, supermajority vote, but then most of the people in the state realized the gov't wasn't representing their beliefs well at all and were pushing unnecessary regualtions/policy down our throats, and the people rose up and voted the whole thing away? Remember when that happened? I do
P.S. Apparently I like run ons. C'mon, let me (us) enjoy that victory a little longer.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

the people in the state realized the gov't wasn't representing their beliefs well at all and were pushing unnecessary regualtions/policy down our throats, and the people rose up and voted the whole thing away?

did you miss the memo?

apparently, the people rose up BECAUSE the gov't wasn't "pushing unnecessary regualtions/policy down our throats" FAST ENOUGH

that's what we're being told, anyway

I here to help clear things up - let me know if you need any more help

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,120]

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

[BDashe 0]

You may be correct in some cases, but that isn't my opinion of the matter which is what I am posting here... By no means do i claim to be a conservative or GOP wannabe mouthpiece. My opinion is not that of the GOP's core values, so don't imply that it is.

I say it is mostly the individual's fault, not the GOP, not the Dems, not the bankers, though they each added contributing factors which if ALL had occurred in the correct order in conjunction could have delayed or averted the matter, the majority of the blame belongs on the individuals who don't want to hear that they spent more than they could afford. Blaming one of the key aspects of our economy that keeps it turning and adding unnecessary restrictions (some may be justified, but cartainly not all he wants to do) in a reactionary, shoot from the hip to stay popular way is going to do more harm than good. When the banks do well they're evil, when they do poorly, they're evil. Doesn't make sense, i think it is important to encourage growth and recovery rather than chastise and punish it.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[airdvr 210]

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

While I agree, that would, (at this point) put another Obama style admin in control

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

While I agree, that would, (at this point) put another Obama style admin in control

Maybe...but the 2 party system is broken. It's like a couple of 4 year olds anymore.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

While I agree, that would, (at this point) put another Obama style admin in control

Maybe...but the 2 party system is broken. It's like a couple of 4 year olds anymore.

Maybe but it does expose the drifting of the two parties from thier roots. I would advocate taking the parties back from the extreemists that have coopted them for thier own use

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal.

I know you posted this not as your position, but as a projection form teh R's to the D's, but Glass-Stegal was repealed under Gramm-Leach-Bliley; 3 REPUBLICANS. Point being, even if it was the repeal, it was drawn up by 3 Repubs.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

You may be correct in some cases, but that isn't my opinion of the matter which is what I am posting here... By no means do i claim to be a conservative or GOP wannabe mouthpiece. My opinion is not that of the GOP's core values, so don't imply that it is.

I say it is mostly the individual's fault, not the GOP, not the Dems, not the bankers, though they each added contributing factors which if ALL had occurred in the correct order in conjunction could have delayed or averted the matter, the majority of the blame belongs on the individuals who don't want to hear that they spent more than they could afford. Blaming one of the key aspects of our economy that keeps it turning and adding unnecessary restrictions (some may be justified, but cartainly not all he wants to do) in a reactionary, shoot from the hip to stay popular way is going to do more harm than good. When the banks do well they're evil, when they do poorly, they're evil. Doesn't make sense, i think it is important to encourage growth and recovery rather than chastise and punish it.

The people have shown over and over that they will spend what is given, so regulations need to be put in place. How about unsecured credit; you can't be extended more than 50% of your proveable annual income. How about regulations on lending and borrowing for homes, etc.

So the gov was complicit by being too lax on lending regs, GWB was complicit for being too stoooopid to understand simple economics and for doing nothing - congress too, and lenders were complicit by being too greedy to avert the obvious.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

I agree, let's bring in the Libertarians to cut all social spending, hire dump truck drivers to go about and pick up all teh dead elderlies, etc. Then with all the vulnerable now dead, the system will work. Kind of Darwinism on roids under the guise of Christianity.

Look at history, unlike conservatives like you do for fear of seeing where your ideologies evolved. Look at the 1850's where we had the slavery-loving Dems and the elitist trash Whigs (similar to neo-Republicans), there were 2 rotten parties and that opened the door for a 3rd to beat them. You (or anyone) can't muster intelligent reasoning to make us believe that the Dems today are for oppression of teh masses and that's what it would take. You can make that argument when describing the R's, but you need a clean-sweep in order to bring in a 3rd party and you don't have the goods.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

While I agree, that would, (at this point) put another Obama style admin in control

Maybe...but the 2 party system is broken. It's like a couple of 4 year olds anymore.

You say that, but look at 12 years of Reagan/GHWB. The debt went from 900B to 4T, taxes went from 70% top brkt to 31% and that was after GHWB raised them a bit. Spending went thru the roof and GHWB's last year left a 290B annual deficit. Clinton came in, cut spending, raised taxes to 40% top brkt and things were awesome; the market went from 3500 to 9800 in 8 years - the longest growth period in US history.

Then your guy comes in and trashes it all - hands it off to Obama and now you want us to believe that there are no good parties out there. In 1 year the market has made an insane recovery, the GDP is just sailing high and unemployment is finally curbed off - work needs to be done there. If, in another year the unemp is 7% and shrinking and all other eco aspects look good, it's gonna be even harder for you to make your silly argument. From 1981 to 2009, 28 years, 20 of those were presided by Republicans and you want to argue there are no good parties left; good luck.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I'm saying they are guilty, as usual, of using it to create scapegoats
>(the rich, the successful, and big business) to further their agenda.

Oh, agreed. So is the GOP. For them it's simple - it's Fannie Mae. It's Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. It's the Community Reinvestment Act. It's Obama's socialist policies. It's poor liberals who want mortgages but are unwilling to pay for them. It's anyone but themselves, in other words.

As the article points out, such approaches do nothing to solve the problem.

If ever we needed a 3rd party the time is now.

While I agree, that would, (at this point) put another Obama style admin in control

Maybe...but the 2 party system is broken. It's like a couple of 4 year olds anymore.

Maybe but it does expose the drifting of the two parties from thier roots. I would advocate taking the parties back from the extreemists that have coopted them for thier own use

How has teh Dems been controlled by extremists? Hell, Clinton signed the homophobic 1996 Marriage Defense Act, the corporate-loving NAFTA tax cut/dereg for rich boys; what leftist extremism? Obama and most Dems were for the 700B gift to the banks so tehy could continue their millions dollar fuck-fests. If the Dems were so extreme left they could have found a way to pass the HC Bill which now looks doomed - you simply can't substantiate your silly claim that the left is extreme. Shit, Obama even decided to continue the RW Iraq/AFG Wars, where's the LW extremism? You're outta gas.