Senate passes 800 billion dollar stimulus without 1 member readind the actual bill!!!

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

Is it the effect of taxation on you personally that you're opposed to, or is it a belief that the economy must be tax averse?

It's how the tax dollars are allocated. I support using taxes for infrastructure and I dislike toll roads. I don't like $1MM state studies to count butterflies or something like that. I believe some taxation can be stimulative. Like the interstate highway system. It enhanced the quality of commerce, revolutionized the assembly line process (by making JIT inventories possible) and created billions of dollars in wealth. I believe in taxing to support schools. I don't have an over-arching belief system...it's more of picking and chosing.

I see the significance...I just wasn't aware that you were focusing on such specialization.

It has kind of worked itself out that way. It wasn't intentional. I really want to be an options trader...and do on the side. I am just not very good at it.

Seems likely, and if it happens....boy oh boy....Obama will have some selling to do....even more so than this "bipartisanship".

This was more based on the notion of war is "necessary" to bring us out of recessions.

It was recommended to me by a friend up here in a similar field. I haven't read it yet and was curious if you had. It revolves around most of the contracts defense companies received during Bush's WoT.

I see. But unless that person knew the real ins and outs of government contracts, then I would be skeptical. There is a legit reason why we buy the proverbial "$100" hammer.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

i realize that all those names are synonomous with moron, but you keep taking my criticism of bush as a criticism of conservatism. bush did not live up to being a fiscal conservative at all.

NO NO NO you are taking what I am saying WRONG and I doubt you realize how staunch the dems were in trying to block regulation..democrats didn't do it until 2007 about 3-4 years too late. In the videos i posted you can watch the Dems roast a regulatory commissioner //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif swearing up and down nothing was wrong and the regulator was just making stuff up.

My father worked for the largest home developer in the northeast part of my state for the last 16 years and his wife was a martgage officer until 2005 (she had done that for well over 20 years) She quit because she couldn't and wouldn't guide people into those messed up sub prime loans. She would have trippled her money per sale/loan but the thing is she know their house payments would skyrocket after the first few years. Instead of doing the bad loans she took early retirement. My fathers boss knew this mess was comming in 2005. He started a huge 1500 to a 2300 house addition across the street from my fathers house but he only put in the streets and sidewalks in where houses were already bought. Usually on a project like that they get all the sewage and water ran on each lot and already have the streets in with sidewalks before the first house is all the way built. As it sits now there are about 80 houses in it LOL. Figure 1400 x $36,000 not including some lots that cost between 75k-140k. He has a lot of money tied up in it.

 

[Rashaddd 5,000+ posts]

Think about it...during the boom you set extra aside for the bust, when you collect assets at fire sale prices. It's a great system for the people who know how to take advantage of it best.

fixed

I'm not sure how people can argue so affirmatively for 100% free market when we have so many crooks and people who time and time again take advantage of and **** the rest of us to make money. We may as well just make the literal act of **** and murder legal and call it the free market.

..

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

The thing about a 100% free market is that people can choose to be ***** or not *****...choose to not even participate in the market.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

NO NO NO you are taking what I am saying WRONG and I doubt you realize how staunch the dems were in trying to block regulation..democrats didn't do it until 2007 about 3-4 years too late. In the videos i posted you can watch the Dems roast a regulatory commissioner //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif swearing up and down nothing was wrong and the regulator was just making stuff up.
My father worked for the largest home developer in the northeast part of my state for the last 16 years and his wife was a martgage officer until 2005 (she had done that for well over 20 years) She quit because she couldn't and wouldn't guide people into those messed up sub prime loans. She would have trippled her money per sale/loan but the thing is she know their house payments would skyrocket after the first few years. Instead of doing the bad loans she took early retirement. My fathers boss knew this mess was comming in 2005. He started a huge 1500 to a 2300 house addition across the street from my fathers house but he only put in the streets and sidewalks in where houses were already bought. Usually on a project like that they get all the sewage and water ran on each lot and already have the streets in with sidewalks before the first house is all the way built. As it sits now there are about 80 houses in it LOL. Figure 1400 x $36,000 not including some lots that cost between 75k-140k. He has a lot of money tied up in it.

i do realize how staunch they railed against regulation, especially in the housing industry, but their is plenty of blame to spread around. like i've always said, the dems spend, they admit they spend. it's their identity. i have a bigger problem with republicans who run on fiscal conservatism, then turn out to be big spenders. i'm a republican because of foreign and fiscal policy. i'm more liberal on social issues. bush sorely let me down on his fiscal policy.

 

[Rashaddd 5,000+ posts]

The thing about a 100% free market is that people can choose to be ***** or not *****...choose to not even participate in the market.

elaborate.

as a member of society, you are, for the most part, forced to participate as far as I can see.

And you could also argue that someone out walking late at night chose to be *****, does that mean we dont acknowledge the crime just because someone didn't take precautions?

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

The thing about a 100% free market is that people can choose to be ***** or not *****...choose to not even participate in the market.

that was her point thing is they HAD to get a certain ammount of those loans out over a month (might have been a quarter) and she would show the people applying what was bad about it and she would get them into a fixxed rate so there would be stability in the payments. 500 bucks a sale on a fixxed rate vs 1200-1500 for the sub prime. She made about 2k a week. She is also a Southern Baptist so if she felt she was taking advantage of someone she wouldn't do it, so you can see the delema she had within her employer. Thing is it really was no her employer that was cracking down it was the CRA bs.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

elaborate.
as a member of society, you are, for the most part, forced to participate as far as I can see.

And you could also argue that someone out walking late at night chose to be *****

so you think everything should be given to you by government? not understanding your argument.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

 

[Rashaddd 5,000+ posts]

so you think everything should be given to you by government? not understanding your argument.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

How you fathomed that from what I was saying is beyond me

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

How you fathomed that from what I was saying is beyond me

i might have missed an earlier point. i hear you saying that you are forced to participate in capitalism. how?

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

i do realize how staunch they railed against regulation, especially in the housing industry, but their is plenty of blame to spread around. like i've always said, the dems spend, they admit they spend. it's their identity. i have a bigger problem with republicans who run on fiscal conservatism, then turn out to be big spenders. i'm a republican because of foreign and fiscal policy. i'm more liberal on social issues. bush sorely let me down on his fiscal policy.

What Bush did well in will not be appreciated until we get attacked again, everything else he pretty well rewrote the books on LOL. I never voted for him but I think history will end up being more forgiving to him as it was to Carter. Carter was like a bottom 3 president and over time worked his way into the top 20 in presidential rating. Bush more than likely will stay in the high 20's as he is rated 36th out of 43 on the list lol

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

elaborate.
as a member of society, you are, for the most part, forced to participate as far as I can see.

No, I am going on your figurative version of ****.

In my idealistic form of 100% free markets, many people would barter as there are times when barter is more effecient than transactions using money. I see no problem with a person making $50MM or $500MM/yr for their job. If they made $50k, it wouldn't increase or decrease MY wage...so why should I worry about what they make. Fools who invest in Madoff and similar scandals should have read the prospectus. THIS INVESTMENT IS NOT GUARENTEED AND MAY LOSE VALUE. It says that in the beginning. You can chose not to invest.

You are forced to participate if you believe that HD Plasma TVs, cars, homes, etc are required for survival. I would argue that they are not and merely luxuries. People lived in caves for 1000s of years without an issue, why are they so different now? I don't participate in many of the things we "have to have" for instance, I only have the most limited cable...and in 2 months when the $19.99 promo expires, I will no longer have the internet. I can get along just fine with no internet and cable. I am not forced into these purchases.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

What Bush did well in will not be appreciated until we get attacked again, everything else he pretty well rewrote the books on LOL. I never voted for him but I think history will end up being more forgiving to him as it was to Carter. Carter was like a bottom 3 president and over time worked his way into the top 20 in presidential rating. Bush more than likely will stay in the high 20's as he is rated 36th out of 43 on the list lol

carter is still a bottom 3 president in my mind. i think he was a good man at heart probably, but that doesn't translate into succesful leadership. carter should change his name to stagflation.

 

[Rashaddd 5,000+ posts]

i might have missed an earlier point. i hear you saying that you are forced to participate in capitalism. how?

personally I have no problem with capitalism in the sense that we are all responsible for making a way for ourselves and choosing our own paths...benefitting and failing based upon our own actions.

What I do have a problem with is criminals who aren't technically called criminals by our 'free market' justice system who get off free and like I said, **** the rest of us for a chunk of change.

What happened to the people in power at these banks that were failing after they stuffed their pockets with our money and fvcked half the country over? Oh, we gave them a bonus...

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

You are forced to participate if you believe that HD Plasma TVs, cars, homes, etc are required for survival. I would argue that they are not and merely luxuries. People lived in caves for 1000s of years without an issue, why are they so different now? I don't participate in many of the things we "have to have" for instance, I only have the most limited cable...and in 2 months when the $19.99 promo expires, I will no longer have the internet. I can get along just fine with no internet and cable. I am not forced into these purchases.

Can't argue with that at all. It's the truth LOL