• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican wins Democratic New York House seat

Conservative said:
Thank you, now explain what that has to do with people signing for loans that they cannot pay back?
Click to expand...
Did you post evidence that anyone took out a loan they knew they couldn't pay back and I missed it?? How'd that happen?
 
Conservative said:
Thank you, now explain what that has to do with people signing for loans that they cannot pay back?
Click to expand...

Why do financial corps. (legally regarded as individuals) make loans they know people will not be able to pay back?

After all the financial corps are supposed to be experts in this right?
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
got any evidence of anyone taking out a loan that they KNEW they could not pay back?
Click to expand...

You are kidding, right, this is an act? Foreclosure records set, obviously because the banks wanted the houses back?
 
winston53660 said:
Why do financial corps. (legally regarded as individuals) make loans they know people they know people will not be able to pay back?

After all the financial corps are supposed to be experts in this right?
Click to expand...

Because they could bundle the loans and make money off them. What does that have to do with people taking out loans that they cannot repay? Where does personal responsibility lie in your world? Who held a gun to the borrowers head and forced them to sign on the dotted line?
 
Conservative said:
Because they could bundle the loans and make money off them. What does that have to do with people taking out loans that they cannot repay? Where does personal responsibility lie in your world? Who held a gun to the borrowers head and forced them to sign on the dotted line?
Click to expand...

So where is fiduciary responsibility in your world?
 
winston53660 said:
So where is fiduciary responsibility in your world?
Click to expand...

There wouldn't be any loans if unqualified individuals took personal responsibility for their own finances and didn't sign for loans they couldn't pay for
 
Conservative said:
There wouldn't be any loans if unqualified individuals took personal responsibility for their own finances and didn't sign for loans they couldn't pay for
Click to expand...
It's as if you don't take personal responsibility for the crap you post. Still waiting for you to post evidence that anyone took out loans they knew they couldn't pay back. A claim you keep repeating sans proof.


:waiting:
 
Conservative said:
When you bought your home did you read the contract? Did you know what your payments were going to be? Second mortgages didn't cause this problem and you know it but the same principle applies, why would anyone sign on to a loan that they couldn't pay? I understand the lending insitution but to blame them is ridiculous. Individual responsibility doesn't exist in your world, does it?
Click to expand...
Bold: Are you ****ing kidding me? I don't have the stats, but I would say seconds were a large part of it. People saw the property values rise so they either got a second to take out the "equity" they thought they had or bought bigger homes. The housing bubble was not caused by low income people buying home or Barny Frank or Chris Dodd or the CRA or President Bush pushing loans to low income people. It was naked greed by the financial sector - Wall Street and the Banksters.
 
Conservative said:
There wouldn't be any loans if unqualified individuals took personal responsibility for their own finances and didn't sign for loans they couldn't pay for
Click to expand...

Uhmmmm no, that is the responsibility of the financial corporation (legally regarded as an individual) to figure out if a person is qualified or unqualified for a loan .
 
pbrauer said:
Bold: Are you ****ing kidding me? I don't have the stats, but I would say seconds were a large part of it. People saw the property values rise so they either got a second to take out the "equity" they thought they had or bought bigger homes. The housing bubble was not caused by low income people buying home or Barny Frank or Chris Dodd or the CRA or President Bush pushing loans to low income people. It was naked greed by the financial sector - Wall Street and the Banksters.
Click to expand...

Then prove it, buying a bigger home isn't a second mortgage. This is total and complete bs having absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic. Not exactly sure what is wrong with you and the other Obama supporters but NY 9 figured it out, when will you? Interesting how you ignore the naked greed out of the biggest sector in our country, the Federal govt. but that is apparently ok with you
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
So still seeking justification for your vote? Obama's current JAR and approval of handling of the economy makes that hard to find. Keep looking rather than admitting that you were wrong and Obama duped you. The People of NY 9 got it, when will you?
Click to expand...

No, I'm just looking for some logical consistency ... or indeed anything besides pure party-line pap from you.
 
pbrauer said:
Bold: Are you ****ing kidding me? I don't have the stats, but I would say seconds were a large part of it. People saw the property values rise so they either got a second to take out the "equity" they thought they had or bought bigger homes. The housing bubble was not caused by low income people buying home or Barny Frank or Chris Dodd or the CRA or President Bush pushing loans to low income people. It was naked greed by the financial sector - Wall Street and the Banksters.
Click to expand...
I personally know someone who took out a line of equity against their home based on the inflated price. Years later the value of their home dropped drastically and the bank drastically lowered the amount of they were eligible to borrow, which was about $40,000 less than they had already borrowed. The bank gave them 30 days to fork over $40,000 or risk losing their home. My wife called a friend who worked at that same bank to learn if we were at risk of receiving a similar letter. Our friend at the bank relieved us that we would not since we had borrowed less than the new amount of credit available but that it had been the week from hell for her because her bank had sent out thousands of letters like that and how she had been spending her days trying to console customers who couldn't raise the money necessary to save their homes; while spending her nights drinking herself to sleep. Our friends, though it wasn't easy, managed to raise the $40,000 and save their home but I can't even begin to guess how many couldn't.

People are crazy if they think second mortgages didn't contribute to the real estate meltdown.
 
AdamT said:
No, I'm just looking for some logical consistency ... or indeed anything besides pure party-line pap from you.
Click to expand...

If Obama is doing so well as you seem to believe why is his JAR as low as it is, why did Republicans take control of the House, why are there more unemployed today than when he took office, why is the GDP so low, why is the misery index rising, why hasn't he kept one economic campaign promise? So many questions and yet so few answers.
 
Conservative said:
You are kidding, right, this is an act? Foreclosure records set, obviously because the banks wanted the houses back?
Click to expand...

The truth is that a lot of people -- probably MOST people -- simply don't have the knowledge to wade through the fine print of a mortgage contract to discover where all the land mines are. A lot of folks got caught out because the lenders were just trying to close deals and didn't give a f*ck if the borrowers could pay. Why should they care? The were getting the loans off the books as fast as they could and dishing them off to investors who didn't have a clue what they were buying. They didn't have a clue, in large part, because the ratings firms were assigning AAA ratings to pure junk.

Generally the law makes a distinction between sophisticated parties who should know better and who tend to have most of the bargaining power, and unsophisticated parties who don't have much bargaining power.

Sure, in a perfect world no one would ever sign a contract that they didn't 100% understand, but this isn't a perfect world. Obama and the Democrats are attempting to minimize this problem going forward through the auspices of the Consumer Protection Agency ... an effort that Republicans are doing their damnedest to derail.
 
Conservative said:
If Obama is doing so well as you seem to believe why is his JAR as low as it is, why did Republicans take control of the House, why are there more unemployed today than when he took office, why is the GDP so low, why is the misery index rising, why hasn't he kept one economic campaign promise? So many questions and yet so few answers.
Click to expand...

Stop spinning. Your argument seems to be that the loss of a democratic NY House seat was a referendum on Obama, but the loss of a republican House seat wasn't. Would you care to explain the obvious inconsistency in your positions?
 
AdamT said:
Stop spinning. Your argument seems to be that the loss of a democratic NY House seat was a referendum on Obama, but the loss of a republican House seat wasn't. Would you care to explain the obvious inconsistency in your positions?
Click to expand...

In both Districts that the Republicans lost there was a T.E.A. Party challenge and the Democrat candidate lost the popular vote as Republicans and T.E.A. Party gave the Democrat the victory. You don't seem to understand that reality.

By the way, I don't see an answer to my questions about the Obama approval ratings and actual results?
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
Stop spinning. Your argument seems to be that the loss of a democratic NY House seat was a referendum on Obama, but the loss of a republican House seat wasn't. Would you care to explain the obvious inconsistency in your positions?
Click to expand...

there is no logical, rational, or honest way to defend such a position.
 
Conservative said:
If Obama is doing so well as you seem to believe why is his JAR as low as it is, why did Republicans take control of the House, why are there more unemployed today than when he took office, why is the GDP so low, why is the misery index rising, why hasn't he kept one economic campaign promise? So many questions and yet so few answers.
Click to expand...

Ill give answering your questions a shot conservative.....

Republicans took the house because americans did not like the way the democrats rammed through Obamacare. Nancy Pelosi has done more singlehandedly to hurt Obama and the democrat party then anything else. Her obvious gloating glaring overbearing attitude when addressing the american people about obamacare and what SHE was going to do...just turned the country immediately against her the democrats and Obama. Thats why the GOP won the house as resoundingly as they did....now that is only my opinion based on closely watching the entire thing unfold.

The misery index is what it is...because the rich and corporations are keeping it high to enable them to control the rhetoric and win the election in 2012...I believe corporations that need to hire are not and will not till after the election.....after the election no matter who wins...the hiring will begin.

He hasnt kept one campaign promise for a couple of reasons...number 1 admittedly he totally misqued with his stimulus buyout plan...but lets not forget bush set that stage right before he left office. The second mistake obama made...was his made rush to universal health care that fundamentally put his entire presidency on hold...he didnt sell it right...and he allowed nancy pelosi to be the spokesperson HUGE MISTAKE. After that the gop took the house and that was the end of getting anything passed that he promised...
I would like to note I didnt vote for Obama and I dont like his agenda...I just like the teaparty and their agenda alot less...
 
Thunder said:
there is no logical, rational, or honest way to defend such a position.
Click to expand...

Do you believe what you are being told or are you part of the problem supporting the liberal socialist ideology? Do you believe is class warfare and how about a Palestinian State "without" Jews? NY 9 voted against the Obama agenda and got it, when will you? Logic and common sense aren't strengths for you. NY 23 and NY 26 both show that the only way a Democrat wins today is with a valid third party on the ballot and that is what Obama is hoping for in 2012. In both elections the Republican and T.E.A. Party fought against themselves instead of a united front against the Democrat who supported the Obama agenda.
 
lpast said:
Ill give answering your questions a shot conservative.....

Republicans took the house because americans did not like the way the democrats rammed through Obamacare. Nancy Pelosi has done more singlehandedly to hurt Obama and the democrat party then anything else. Her obvious gloating glaring overbearing attitude when addressing the american people about obamacare and what SHE was going to do...just turned the country immediately against her the democrats and Obama. Thats why the GOP won the house as resoundingly as they did....now that is only my opinion based on closely watching the entire thing unfold.

The misery index is what it is...because the rich and corporations are keeping it high to enable them to control the rhetoric and win the election in 2012...I believe corporations that need to hire are not and will not till after the election.....after the election no matter who wins...the hiring will begin.

He hasnt kept one campaign promise for a couple of reasons...number 1 admittedly he totally misqued with his stimulus buyout plan...but lets not forget bush set that stage right before he left office. The second mistake obama made...was his made rush to universal health care that fundamentally put his entire presidency on hold...he didnt sell it right...and he allowed nancy pelosi to be the spokesperson HUGE MISTAKE. After that the gop took the house and that was the end of getting anything passed that he promised...
I would like to note I didnt vote for Obama and I dont like his agenda...I just like the teaparty and their agenda alot less...
Click to expand...

You make some good points but you ignore that the Obama resume showed exactly what he was going to do, delegate responsibility to someone else and no leader can do that. You can delegate authority but not responsibility.

You are right about Obamacare however Pelosi said "we have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it" so that doesn't indicate to me that Obama didn't have involvement but again he stayed away from accepting responsibility for it.

You are right about the failed stimulus and even when the stimulus was shown to be a failure Obama had moved on to Obamacare. Big mistake as you pointed out. The rich and corporations aren't going to spend their money without confidence in this Administration and the best news they can hear is, "Barack Obama, you're fired!"

I didn't vote for Obama and won't in 2012. He is a far leftwing ideologue whose entire agenda is based upon class warfare and redistribution of wealth. I have absolutely no problem with the T.E.A. party but know they better unite or obama will win a second term. That happened in NY 23 and NY 26 giving those Districts to Demcrats. A valid third party will give Obama another 4 years.

Obama's class warfare rhetoric is scary but more scary is how many people are buying the rhetoric. This country wasn't built on those principles and always has promoted individual wealth creation. There are over 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans and you don't raise taxes until you get them back to work.
 
Conservative said:
Do you believe what you are being told or are you part of the problem supporting the liberal socialist ideology?..

..NY 9 voted against the Obama agenda and got it, when will you?...
Click to expand...

your questions are both loaded and dishonest. how do you expect anyone to answer such dishonest and hyperbolic questions?
 
Thunder said:
your questions are both loaded and dishonest. how do you expect anyone to answer such dishonest and hyperbolic questions?
Click to expand...

You seem to answer my question, you truly believe in the leftwing socialist agenda!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom