Posted on 10/04/2008 7:57:55 AM PDT by Pontiac
And now we will soon owe $700 billion, or far more in reality, more to foreign lenders because WE ARE BROKE and $13 TRILLION in debt now and can't cover the bailout ourselves. I'm not financially savvy enough to intelligently comment on this type thread, but since I, my kids, and their kids, and their kids, ad infinitum will be taxed through the nose to pay for this debacle I will anyway and risk showing my ignorance.
First of all, IMHO lenders who encouraged unqualified buyers to buy homes, luxury vehicles, and other properties they couldn't afford by offering sub prime rates should not have been bailed out by taxpaying people who are struggling to stay afloat themselves when they knew perfectly well that they were heading for a future collapse that would ultimately drive the US even deeper into insolvency. How on earth can anyone justify allowing execs of failed lenders to walk away from the disaster they created with tens of millions of dollars in their pockets when they are responsible for costing the taxpayers trillions of dollars that we don't have, and may have trouble getting from the usual overseas sources who must be close to the point of telling us to get our house in order or do without their help?
I don't know much about high finance, but even a fiscal dummy like me can see that this entire debacle and the government's response to it stinks to high heaven. Where was government oversight of banking and lending institutions when this was going on, it wasn't done in secret. I have to wonder how many in Congress and the Senate are also walking away from the debacle with pockets stuffed full of the green paper that the government still insists is money.
Any of you out there who may be in the banking business or who know a lot more about it that I obviously don't are more than welcome to try to educate me on the intricacies of high finance if you care to.
Unfortunately that seems to be the path that the Dims are leading us down.
Ever increasing regulation mantra of the left.
The Dim’s talking points of the banking crisis blaming the Republicans for not regulating the financial markets point to their desire to tightly control every aspect of the flow of wealth.
Not only the wealth, but how all of our businesses must operate.
That is part of how they control the flow of wealth.
The primary method of course is the tax code.
Capitalism allows mismanaged businesses to fail and be their assets to be bought by other businesses. Socialism makes way for the governments, using taxpayer funds to catch or save failing businesses before they go into bankruptcy.
CitiBank with funding from the Federal Reserve was going to save Wachovia but they took too long. Instead Wells Fargo stepped in and bought Wachovia with NO assistance from the Feds or the taxpayers. Now the hook is in the hands of the Wells Fargo stockholders, NOT the US taxpayer.
Give American businessmen enough time and we tend to straighten out every mismanaged business. It goes against our good sense to allow a need to sit unnourished for very long. It takes a little time to gather all the private investors together and agree on who will provide what percentage of the money necessary, which in turn also separates risk percentages into affordable numbers.
>I’m not financially savvy enough to intelligently comment on this type thread, but since I, my kids, and their kids, and their kids, ad infinitum will be taxed through the nose to pay for this debacle I will anyway and risk showing my ignorance.<
Where you will feel the most obvious difference may not be in tax increases but in denial of services due to your financial net worth. That’s another way of saying that you will have to pay a larger co-payment to receive something than previously.
Kind of like going to the hospital and learning that your bed costs you $400 a day plus your insurance premiums, while the illegal alien next to you is being treated for free. You have a house, two cars, a boat, a small hunting cabin in Colorado and a 401K while that poor man doesn’t have anything of value.
Or your Social Security payments will be $1000 a month while the other guy gets $1500 a month because you have a net worth of $800K. He only has his 6 year old Chevy. You can afford to maintain your lifestyle from your own assets, he can’t.
Instead of outright taking from you and giving to someone less fortunate that’s how it’ll work.
Speaking of socialism.
Which political party adopted the following as part of their platform?
We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunities for employment and earning a living.
The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: . . . an end to the power of the financial interests.
We demand profit sharing in big business.
We demand a broad extention of care for the aged.
We demand . . . the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchase of the national, state, and municipal governments.
In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of the entire system of public education. . . .
We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents. . . .
The government must undertake the improvement of public health - by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor . . . by the greatest possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth.
[We] combat the . . . materialistic spirit within and without us and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of The Common Good Before the Individual Good.
Obama & Democrat Party? Good guess, but no. Answer: The National Socialist Workers Party of Germany. Nazi for short. The excerpts above were adopted in Munich, on February 24, 1920. Source: Der Nationalsozialismus Dokumente 1933-1945, edited by Walther Hofer, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Bucherei, 1957, pp. 29-31.
Call me crazy, but that doesn’t really sound like the democrat. For as radical as we like to think they are the are closer to us than any other party in the history of time. People have an overwhelming drive to define themselves by what they are not. We need an ‘other’...ours are the dems. Flame away.
Not until you say it in English.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.