The Bamster F**ks up the oath of office

[Boomer]

And as for the original subject of the thread, I agree that it is petty and irrelevent to fault Obama or the Chief Justice for garbling the oath. Geez, they're still people, too.

Despite how Obamaphiles want to cast every skeptic as some rabid Obama hater, I really do hope that he does a good job things turn out for the best for our country in the manner that the founders of our nation intended. Unfortunately, I had that same belief at the beginning of Clinton's admistration and was greatly let down.

 

[Boxxerace]

Yes, it is about priorities.

No, not every single liberty is more important than security. And it's not the government's job to babysit us.

Quote of the century! :awesomework:

 

[Lucky Jeff]

I had that same belief at the beginning of Clinton's admistration and was greatly let down.

I'd rather be known for squirtin on a womans dress then taking down the country :fawkdancesmiley:

 

[Boomer]

I'd rather be known for squirtin on a womans dress then taking down the country :fawkdancesmiley:

The reason for the current downfall goes back well before Bush 43, Clinton, or Bush 41. It began with Reagan's voodoo economics. While trickle down economics paved the way for what we thought was the economic prosperity of the 1990s, it was ultimately all just a house of cards built on a foundation of credit.

And make no mistake about, had Clinton been able to impose all of his agenda, we'd be in even deeper crap now. He was forced to become much more moderate/centrist after getting *****slapped in the 1994 mid-term elections.

 

[slidillon]

Seems to me that many people, particularly supporters of government subsidized health care who post on a website about something as non-essential as offroading, have spoken loud and clear about what their priorities are. They want to do whatever they want and let someone else pay for their irresponsible behavior.

Now we are getting somewhere. I wholeheartedly agree! Too many people want to do whatever it is that makes them fell good or look well off, only to be skirting their financial responsibilities.

And in case there was any confusion before, I never said I was a supporter of any government subsidized health care. I simply used health care as a random example to make a point. So, so far we are on the same page.

No, not every single liberty is more important than security. Health care is not a matter of national security. And it's not the government's job to babysit us.

Again, we agree. I would be much happier with less government, especially Federal, intervention in our lives. I am a grown ass man and don't need to be looked after or provided for by anyone. I make my own way.

Health care is not a matter of national security, but it is a type of security itself. Same as clean drinking water or a sound judicial system. These things help make society operate smoothly and provide a feeling of security to people. In my opinion, they are more important to the survival of the society than some liberties are.

So then we agree? Not every liberty is more important than every security and both of us do not favor socialized medicine. See that wasn't so hard.

 

[CrustyJeep]

You're blaming trickle down economics for out of control credit? :haha: This **** gets better all the time.

I bet it had nothing at all to do with actual government policy to spur increased home ownership by lowering the barrier to mortgage lending, huh?

 

[GRNTACO]

I bet it had nothing at all to do with actual government policy to spur increased home ownership by lowering the barrier to mortgage lending, huh?

That's a fact but not relevant in this thread.:haha:

 

[Boomer]

You're blaming trickle down economics for out of control credit? :haha: This **** gets better all the time.

I bet it had nothing at all to do with actual government policy to spur increased home ownership by lowering the barrier to mortgage lending, huh?

Yes, I said that uncontrolled borrowing, or out of control credit, is responsible for our current situation. In the case of trickle down economics, it was the government borrowing that was out of control. Take a look at historical rates of saving and debt in our country. I suppose it's just a coincidence that government borrowing spiked upward at the same time as consumer debt jumped and savings rates plummeted.

How long can our government operate beyond it's means? Forever? Are we just going to keep on creating more money? Seems that ride has to end sooner or later.

And none of that absolves consumers and lenders of their responsibility for this mess. Regardless of any government policy, lenders and borrowers have a responsibility to use sound judgement.

 

[TreeClimber]

And none of that absolves consumers and lenders of their responsibility for this mess. Regardless of any government policy, lenders and borrowers have a responsibility to use sound judgement.

Sound judgement -v- Corporate greed.

Greed wins every time.

Our financial mess started right here in the NW with Nordstroms (if I recall correctly, and I'm not sure I do)

edit - Diners Club is widely credited as the first credit card, however something I'd read prior implied Nordy pre-dates diners club, only now I cannot verify.

 

[CrustyJeep]

You mean the tendancy to lower taxes while increasing spending is what caused much of the crisis we're in today. Fine, but that isn't "trickle down economics".

 

[Boomer]

That was Reagan's version of trickle down economics.

Sure we bankrupted the USSR.

Looks like we bankrupted ourselves, too.

 

[Boomer]

Sound judgement -v- Corporate greed.

Greed wins every time.

Our financial mess started right here in the NW with Nordstroms (if I recall correctly, and I'm not sure I do)

I agree to an extent.

But corporations did not force anyone to use exotic specialty loans to finance more house than they needed for an initially low monthly payment. Greedy, shortsighted and ignorant borrowers did most of that all on their own.

And what is the story with Nordstroms?

 

[Motodestroyer69]

And none of that absolves consumers and lenders of their responsibility for this mess. Regardless of any government policy, lenders and borrowers have a responsibility to use sound judgement.

That's one of the things Obama said in his inaugural address...

 

[Boomer]

That's one of the things Obama said in his inaugural address...

Yeah, well, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

Just sayin'...

Or maybe he will impress me.

Time will tell.

 

[Lucky Jeff]

Yeah, well, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

Just sayin'...

Or maybe he will impress me.

Time will tell.

he'll impress you just as much as I do
































:haha:

 

[CrustyJeep]

That was Reagan's version of trickle down economics.

Well, I guess if we're allowed to make up new definitions for things, then sure :shaking:

Borrow and spend != trickle down economics. Quit being dumb.

 

[CrustyJeep]

But corporations did not force anyone to use exotic specialty loans to finance more house than they needed for an initially low monthly payment. Greedy, shortsighted and ignorant borrowers did most of that all on their own.

Correct EXCEPT that corporations were all but forced by federal policy to make loans available to people that couldn't afford to pay them back. That's where it started. Those greedy ****ers were there all along, but until they were actually given more money than they could pay back, they were of little consequence.

Couple that with a lack of oversight which allowed those bad loans to go unnoticed for so long, and BOOM!

 

[Dude]

The reason for the current downfall goes back well before Bush 43, Clinton, or Bush 41. It began with Reagan's voodoo economics. While trickle down economics paved the way for what we thought was the economic prosperity of the 1990s, it was ultimately all just a house of cards built on a foundation of credit.

And make no mistake about, had Clinton been able to impose all of his agenda, we'd be in even deeper crap now. He was forced to become much more moderate/centrist after getting *****slapped in the 1994 mid-term elections.

:awesomework: winner!!

 

[CrustyJeep]

What would be the connection between government deficit spending, and private sector credit use increases?

 

[Binder]

What would be the connection between government deficit spending, and private sector credit use increases?

Stupidity is contageouse?

 

[GRNTACO]

What would be the connection between government deficit spending, and private sector credit use increases?

Greed?

 

[CrustyJeep]

Greed?

The government isn't greedy. People are greedy.

But nonetheless, what's the connection? People see the government behaving all greedy like, so they increase their greed to match? The government gets a billion dollar satellite, so I get a million dollar house? Doesn't make sense...

 

[Boomer]

Well, I guess if we're allowed to make up new definitions for things, then sure :shaking:

Borrow and spend != trickle down economics. Quit being dumb.

Have a seance and tell it to Reagan.

It's not like it was my idea.

 

[CrustyJeep]

It's not like it was my idea.

Reagan told you to be dumb?

You're making zero sense. Seriously.

 

[Boomer]

Correct EXCEPT that corporations were all but forced by federal policy to make loans available to people that couldn't afford to pay them back. That's where it started. Those greedy ****ers were there all along, but until they were actually given more money than they could pay back, they were of little consequence.

Couple that with a lack of oversight which allowed those bad loans to go unnoticed for so long, and BOOM!

They were not forced to do anything. Not even to hang themselves with the rope that they were given.

 

[Boomer]

Reagan told you to be dumb?

You're making zero sense. Seriously.

He must have told you to be obtuse.

 

[CrustyJeep]

They were not forced to do anything. Not even to hang themselves with the rope that they were given.

Oh, cryptic is fun...

 

[Boomer]

What would be the connection between government deficit spending, and private sector credit use increases?

Example?

Don't worry, be happy?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

Maybe it's all just a convenient coincidence.

 

[Boomer]

Oh, cryptic is fun...

Conspiracies about government policies that forced lenders to make all kinds of crazy, irresponsible loans are even funner. Or funnier. :haha:

 

[GRNTACO]

The government isn't greedy. People are greedy.

But nonetheless, what's the connection? People see the government behaving all greedy like, so they increase their greed to match? The government gets a billion dollar satellite, so I get a million dollar house? Doesn't make sense...

I think the government is greedy and can be driven by greed just as we can be. Greed isn't' just about wealth but can also be about possessions.