Personal responsibility is important. And it should have been the personal responsibility of the lenders to not give out a volume of toxic loans that they overexposed to the point of nearly collapsing our entire financial system. Or perhaps the personal responsibility of the ratings agencies to not rate things they once deemed shit as AAA once it's repackaged into tranches.

There's nothing we can do about idiots applying for loans they can't afford. Blaming them is useless, and correcting that part of the problem is impossible. Nothing more than a straw man for people who want to defend the banks to appear intelligent and/or "pro business."

gut;1255816 wrote:I don't blame the motorcycle manufacturer because someone kills themselves doing 150 on their bike. I don't blame Budweiser because some alcoholic can pick-up up a 24-pack and drink himself silly. I guess I missed the part where these home buyers had a gun held to their head and forced to sign. Like I said, liberals don't believe in personal responsibility and are always looking for scapegoats.

you don't blame the conscienceless financial institutions ripping people off by taking advantage of the natural hope of people for adequate housing.

gut;1255816 wrote:I don't blame the motorcycle manufacturer because someone kills themselves doing 150 on their bike. I don't blame Budweiser because some alcoholic can pick-up up a 24-pack and drink himself silly. I guess I missed the part where these home buyers had a gun held to their head and forced to sign. Like I said, liberals don't believe in personal responsibility and are always looking for scapegoats.

Conservatives believe in responsibility for everyone but corporations.

We should have been more like Iceland and less like Greece in our response to the problem.

I Wear Pants;1255948 wrote:Conservatives believe in responsibility for everyone but corporations.

Really? Did I miss the part where Bear and Lehman DIDN'T disappear?

gut;1255974 wrote:Really? Did I miss the part where Bear and Lehman DIDN'T disappear?

Oh you've got to be kidding. You really think the financial sector was held responsible for their actions? Giving them billions and billions of dollars for free and trillions of dollars of interest free or essentially so loans doesn't count as being held responsible to me.

I Wear Pants;1256006 wrote:Oh you've got to be kidding. You really think the financial sector was held responsible for their actions? Giving them billions and billions of dollars for free and trillions of dollars of interest free or essentially so loans doesn't count as being held responsible to me.

Just answer the question. Did the first two banks that got into trouble - Bear and Lehman - were they bailed out? Did the "fat cats" at the ones that survived not lose millions and millions of dollars in equity value? Was the "bailout" money not repaid in full, plus interest? I get the free market arguments, but ultimately the govt made a loan, which happens every day in business and it's no big deal.

GM, however, is a different story. But people don't talk too much about how the union robbed investors. No tax payer money lost to the "fat cats", billions lost to the union hogs. Yet, which one do people bitch about?

Do you consider the trillions in interest free loans part of the "bailout"?

And seriously, look at Iceland. Their recovery is much better than anyone who decided that bailouts and austerity were smart things to do. No recession or depression has ever been climbed out of through austerity.

I Wear Pants;1256031 wrote:Do you consider the trillions in interest free loans part of the "bailout"?

And seriously, look at Iceland. Their recovery is much better than anyone who decided that bailouts and austerity were smart things to do. No recession or depression has ever been climbed out of through austerity.

And no country has fallen due to fiscal responsibility. Look at Germany's relative gain in the Eurozone.

Keynesian economics/government bloat only works if utilized effectively, even the hard core Keynesians know this. This administration is beyond politics but rather into the competence realm. Can anyone with a straight face argue that after the absolute failure of Stim 1 that Obama, Biden and company can effectively spend another US$4-5T in debt? I don't know how anyone can defend the fiscal policies of Obama and use that with any sort of intellectual honesty. Even the Obama administration doesn't which is why their '12 campaign is all negative and attack, rather than hope and change.

We gave him 4 years. He failed. There's no reason to believe the next 4 years (if he's re-elected) will be different. Given the incompetence of his campaign so far it appears he hasn't learned much. If you care about the country even if you support this failure at least admit he needs to change his entire economic approach. If he wins and doesn't, the country deserves what it voted for. Equality for all. We'll all be economically miserable. I continue to be pissed at myself for not recognizing all of this in '08 when in a maelstrom of economic failures we gave a drunk the key to the car.

Manhattan Buckeye;1256042 wrote:And no country has fallen due to fiscal responsibility. Look at Germany's relative gain in the Eurozone.

Keynesian economics/government bloat only works if utilized effectively, even the hard core Keynesians know this. This administration is beyond politics but rather into the competence realm. Can anyone with a straight face argue that after the absolute failure of Stim 1 that Obama, Biden and company can effectively spend another US$4-5T in debt? I don't know how anyone can defend the fiscal policies of Obama and use that with any sort of intellectual honesty. Even the Obama administration doesn't which is why their '12 campaign is all negative and attack, rather than hope and change.

We gave him 4 years. He failed. There's no reason to believe the next 4 years (if he's re-elected) will be different. Given the incompetence of his campaign so far it appears he hasn't learned much. If you care about the country even if you support this failure at least admit he needs to change his entire economic approach. If he wins and doesn't, the country deserves what it voted for. Equality for all. We'll all be economically miserable. I continue to be pissed at myself for not recognizing all of this in '08 when in a maelstrom of economic failures we gave a drunk the key to the car.

NOT MY PRESIDENT ..... some of you should have followed Belly wisdom

I Wear Pants;1256031 wrote:No recession or depression has ever been climbed out of through austerity.

If you consider a balanced budget "austerity", it can and does happen, and even before Keynes was a twinkle in his father's eye.

Keynesian economics has helped smooth recessions in the past, but it is failing on a massive level globally now. It's ineffective because people now are staring point-blank at huge tax increases down the road to sustain it. You're just flushing money down the toilet, and the uncertainty and tax regime is actually having the opposite effect slowing growth.

I Wear Pants;1256031 wrote: No recession or depression has ever been climbed out of through austerity.

You need austerity AND pro-growth incentives. However, you cannot get pro-growth policy from the obama regime; all you can get is hostility. Consequently business sits on $2 trillion and will not put it at risk in capital investment until they get a leader in the White House they can trust.

Belly35;1256097 wrote:NOT MY PRESIDENT ...

Do you remember when Julia Roberts used the exact same words to describe GWB, and many of the Huddlers came on saying she was a moron, because she was a citizen of the US, and he was the president of the US, and that made him her president?

It's kinda like that.

O-Trap;1256144 wrote:Do you remember when Julia Roberts used the exact same words to describe GWB, and many of the Huddlers came on saying she was a moron, because she was a citizen of the US, and he was the president of the US, and that made him her president?

It's kinda like that.

I do remember that. Seemed that whenever any celeb-type said anything negative about Bush and Iraq back in that time, words like "hollyweird", "anti-american" and the such came up.

Good to know it was all hypocritical partisanship instead of any actual conviction creating the basis for that criticism of their opinions.

O-Trap;1256144 wrote:Do you remember when Julia Roberts used the exact same words to describe GWB, and many of the Huddlers came on saying she was a moron, because she was a citizen of the US, and he was the president of the US, and that made him her president?

It's kinda like that.

Actually, it's kinda like George Bush was a regular, real, American; some other people are Marxists and communists, and thus for them, Bush was not their president since they march to a much different beat. I can understand where they were coming from, can you?

QuakerOats;1256207 wrote:Actually, it's kinda like George Bush was a regular, real, American; some other people are Marxists and communists, and thus for them, Bush was not their president since they march to a much different beat. I can understand where they were coming from, can you?

QuakerOats;1256207 wrote:Actually, it's kinda like George Bush was a regular, real, American; some other people are Marxists and communists, and thus for them, Bush was not their president since they march to a much different beat. I can understand where they were coming from, can you?

If, by that, you mean the president is not the one you prefer, then sure, but he's still your president. Whether or not you like him makes him no more or less your president.

I thought Julia's comment was stupid, as did several right-leaning members on the Huddle, and their logic was the same as mine is now. You don't have to like him, but saying he's not your president isn't accurate. If you're an American citizen, and the person in question holds the office of President of the United States, then he is indeed your president.

Also Bush's "No Child Left Behind," stimulus, bailout, and the huge debt increase (even after factoring in inflation) hardly contrast him from Obama as a "regular, real American." Better or worse is up for discussion, but the man was hardly a beacon of fiscal conservatism.

O-Trap;1256144 wrote:Do you remember when Julia Roberts used the exact same words to describe GWB, and many of the Huddlers came on saying she was a moron, because she was a citizen of the US, and he was the president of the US, and that made him her president?

It's kinda like that.

True, though it feels like it's not even worth pointing out over and over given the obviousness of what goes on. The majority of people treat politics like team sports. Their opinions will change and mold to best fit their justification for why "their guys" are good and the other side is bad. Both sides are equally guilty.

If the Bush administration used drones that resulted in 16% civilian casualties, he'd be called a war criminal by the left, not a sound since Obama is doing it. Same for his extension of the Bush tax cuts, the Patriot Act, Guantanamo, etc.

On the right, all of a sudden the debt is the most important issue in the world. Despite their support of an administration that sent us into two unfunded wars that ran up over a trillion in debt, and their own VP stating "deficits don't matter."

I suspect it's a combination of being simple, it's much more challenging to think of what your opinion on individual issues are than to simply support one "side" all the time, and people just wanting a group to blame their own problems on(think: "Dey took yer Jerbs!" type crowd.)

The good news is, one side's head will implode this November and it will be fascinating/hilarious to watch. Looks like it's going to be the Republicans suffering this time, which is good, they're generally more entertaining anyway.

O-Trap;1256144 wrote:Do you remember when Julia Roberts used the exact same words to describe GWB, and many of the Huddlers came on saying she was a moron, because she was a citizen of the US, and he was the president of the US, and that made him her president?

It's kinda like that.

Because then it was ok to say W was a moron, in fact you were weird if you didn't. Now we aren't allowed to even criticize the current POTUS in the MSM's eyes or else we are racist. Do you not see the difference? Dissent then = patriotic. Dissent now = racist. Even if the guy is a total douche...for God's sake while praising Neil Armstrong he (or his handlers, to my wife's point there shouldn't be a difference) posted a picture of himself gazing up at the skies as if he's ever done a single damn thing in his life. I don't think the country can handle four more years of this crap. To my earlier point it is beyond politics, the guy is an emperor without clothes that apparently thinks he's the greatest emperor in history. We were idiots in '08. All of us.

Manhattan Buckeye;1256680 wrote:Because then it was ok to say W was a moron, in fact you were weird if you didn't. Now we aren't allowed to even criticize the current POTUS in the MSM's eyes or else we are racist. Do you not see the difference? Dissent then = patriotic. Dissent now = racist. Even if the guy is a total douche...for God's sake while praising Neil Armstrong he (or his handlers, to my wife's point there shouldn't be a difference) posted a picture of himself gazing up at the skies as if he's ever done a single damn thing in his life. I don't think the country can handle four more years of this crap. To my earlier point it is beyond politics, the guy is an emperor without clothes that apparently thinks he's the greatest emperor in history. We were idiots in '08. All of us.

Honestly, my point wasn't even to rip on either president (I rip on both of them plenty, but elsewhere). It was to point out the hypocrisy. Either Julia Roberts and Belly are both justified in the statement, or neither of them is.

O-Trap;1256717 wrote:Honestly, my point wasn't even to rip on either president (I rip on both of them plenty, but elsewhere). It was to point out the hypocrisy. Either Julia Roberts and Belly are both justified in the statement, or neither of them is.

Another difference: Belly is a poster in an anonymous forum, you will find anonymous posters with fringe beliefs (right wingers on Free Republic, left wingers on Mother Jones, each as an example) on anonymous message boards. Julia Roberts is a public figure millionaire making mostly crap (Larry Crowne - awful).

The issue isn't whether one is POTUS is better than the other. Barack Obama is the POTUS. I'm an American. I pay (too many) taxes as an American and I think he's awful but I can say that on anonymous board. A public figure is under more scrutiny, and as apparent through the Chik-Fil-A CEO's comments if you criticize the current regime (even on subjects the POTUS believed in back in '08) you are subject to ridicule and threats - to my knowledge Julia Roberts didn't get much of a backlash, people still go to her s$&%*y movies. We're in a dangerous spot right now, and usually our leaders stand up to the occasion to unite us. Obama has done the opposite. He's a poor leader.

Manhattan Buckeye;1256732 wrote:I pay (too many) taxes as an American

Yeah, tax rates are so outrageous right now :rolleyes:

and as apparent through the Chik-Fil-A CEO's comments if you criticize the current regime

I don't recall that being about anyone's criticism of Obama. More the fact their CEO thought God was going to punish America for allowing gays to marry. Did he even criticize Obama in either of his interviews? I don't even recall it, and if he did it certainly wasn't the focus of the outrage.

to my knowledge Julia Roberts didn't get much of a backlash

OTrap can explain his point better than I, but it seemed the point was about people on this forum getting upset about Roberts/the Dixie Chicks/whoevers comments back when Bush was President, then doing the same thing once the other side is in power.

We're in a dangerous spot right now, and usually our leaders stand up to the occasion to unite us. Obama has done the opposite. He's a poor leader.

LOL at "poor leader" and "standing up to the occasion to unite us." Real substantial, thought-out criticism there.

Really disheartened that we've been sucked into having a serious discussion on a thread beginning with the word "Cummunity" and followed by nonsensical rambling.

I'm beginning to think Belly is just a really dedicated(and successful) troll.

"Yeah, tax rates are so outrageous right now"

Paid $35 large last year despite being in the U.S. for 2 months - that's an expensive vote. At our tax rate if we lived in NYC we would have paid about 45% in some sort of tax. Pretty outrageous in my opinion, don't know how the 50% that pay next to nothing feel - educate me.

" More the fact their CEO thought God was going to punish America for allowing gays to marry."

Which Obama claimed shouldn't be acceptable either in his '08 campaign. When did gay marriage become an American right? 6 weeks ago? Complete red herring. I don't care about gay marriage, the gays can screw themselves into oblivion. I care socially about adoption rights and more importantly our economic future.

"LOL at "poor leader" and "standing up to the occasion to unite us." Real substantial, thought-out criticism there."

You want more, visit the Obama reelection website. What the hell are you talking about? If you don't think this isn't a completely negative campaign I don't know how to address substantial, thought-out criticism.

I don't get the Obamabots, very few are better off now than in '08 despite the fiscal crash, many more are hurting and our young people are looking at a life of debt from government promises and college costs.

But hey, we elected a black (sort of) President, just the wrong one IMO.

Keep punching.

"nonsensical rambling"

Yours?

Titles .... Given out like cheap candy at a parade.

Belly rule is you earn the title or you loss the title ...

I don't call anyone a friend until you earn that honor, why would I call someone President a lesser status than friendship who has not earned that accolade as President. He may have won the position but has he earned the honor.

Should I say what I don’t believe because of respect of the office? The office is only a room and the title is only ego. Because he won the position … winning is one thing but winning does not translate into leadership action and what best for America.

Obama and his Administration is a joke, his agenda is a failure, his view of America, its people and the American Constitution he has disrespected so why would I want to call that individual anything but want his is … a person nothing more.
Take, blame, divide, racist, lie, fraud, failure, deny and hiding .. Are those really worthy of accolades?

I will predict that Obama will not release his educational transcript because he is an also a fraud, lied, illegally fraud the system and demonstrated anti-American and socialist writing. Is that worthy of accolades?

Obama is no better that you or I at the end of the day his is a person. Why not call me President Belly.
I would rather be called friend and earn that respect than be called President and you not knowing if I earned that right in the companies.

Walk around with your head in the sand and follow poor leadership and praise the person as President ... and lower yourself for doing so.

You can be politically correct but for me I want to be true to myself. I follow no man, I follow want I believe

Politician work for you, you don’t have to call them anything but what you feel they have earned.