• 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!

Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton[W:336]

Who would you rather have as president?


  • Total voters
    49
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

No, you came up with a Wiki page about the meltdown in 2007. A few problems:

Wiki isn't a source.

Actually, Wikipedia is sourced. You can check out the sources in References section.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

JPMorgan growth since Glass–Steagall was eliminated. Coincidence?

Glass

View attachment 67168173

You're not having the same conversation I am. I'm not talking about the past or GLB. I'm talking about Warren & the CFPB/Dodd Frank, and the damage it is doing and will continue to do, which in the end will note bode well for the consumers they claim they want to protect.

Nothing, by the way, is in the Warren/CFPB ideas that will stop Morgan from getting bigger. Just the opposite. That's what I'm saying.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Actually, Wikipedia is sourced. You can check out the sources in References section.

I have a Wiki account. I can edit that page.

And my posts had nothing to do with what happened in 2007-2008 with the mortgage backed securities and hedge funds. I'm talking about the CFPB and Elizabeth Warren.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Exactly, it is all rhetoric and slogans with no substance. But slogans and the rhetoric people want to hear wins elections, not substance.

Amadeus is living proof of what I already knew about a lot of the Warren champions. They have no idea what it is she's proposed/proposing. I don't champion a politician's words when I admittedly don't understand them. When I do that, all I'm doing is bobbing my head in agreement with talking points, rhetoric, and pandering.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Poll would have been immensely improved with a "neither" option, thereby illustrating the overall popularity or lack thereof of each. It's difficult to conclude that a limited forced choice reveals much of anything.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Clinton is staggeringly overrated, IMO.

But what does Warren stand for?

Where does she stand on Gitmo, drone strikes, foreign policy in general, Obamacare, big government, the Fed, a balanced budget, bank bailouts, corporate bailouts, TARP (I assume she was for that), etc.?
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

I don't know much about Warren outside of a Colbert Report interview, so I just voted Hilary.

The next election looks like it won't be having any electrifying choices.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

You're not having the same conversation I am. I'm not talking about the past or GLB. I'm talking about Warren & the CFPB/Dodd Frank, and the damage it is doing and will continue to do, which in the end will note bode well for the consumers they claim they want to protect.

I think we're having the correct conversation.

The Dodd-Frank Act - Council on Foreign Relations

The Banking Act of 1933 ("Glass-Steagall") established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and several regulations, including preventing deposit-taking commercial banks from speculating on stocks. In 1934 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was created to regulate securities trading. But Glass-Steagall restrictions began to erode in the 1960s, until finally President Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which erased the barrier between commercial banks and investment banks.

Financial innovation continued to move derivatives beyond their roots in agricultural futures, and the regulatory status of several types of derivatives was uncertain. The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 explicitly stated that most "over-the-counter" (OTC) derivatives would not be regulated at the contract level, though dealers could be subject to firm level regulations. Banks tended to prefer OTCs to derivatives traded on exchanges such as the Chicago Board of Trade; OTCs could be customized to fit client needs, and they were often more profitable because competition was less perfect and prices were more opaque.

In the wake of the global financial crisis and recession that began in 2007, attention turned toward perceived regulatory failures to restrain excessive risk taking and questionable practices. On July 21, 2010, Dodd-Frank was enacted.

...

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Many analysts cite the predatory lending practices of major home lenders, such as Countrywide Financial (purchased by Bank of America in 2008), as a contributing factor to the financial crisis. Countrywide, the country's largest home lender, was sued by several states in 2008 for predatory practices. As a settlement the company agreed to provide $8.4 billion in loan relief to some 400,000 borrowers. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was created to help prevent such industry abuses and to integrate federal regulations protecting individual consumers into one agency.

Elizabeth Warren, then a special adviser instrumental in the bureau's formation, explained in House testimony that CFPB's overall goal was "making markets for consumer financial products and services work in a fair, transparent, and competitive manner." She also listed the bureau's priorities as follows: mortgages, credit cards, financial education, consumer complaints, information technology, and supervision, enforcement, and fair lending.

The CFPB has drawn substantial criticism from Republican lawmakers, some of whom helped delay the Senate confirmation process of Warren and then Richard Cordray for director. GOP criticism largely centered on CFPB's powers; Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) said the bureau's director had "unprecedented authority over the American people without any checks."

Warren won the Massachusetts Senate seat in November 2011, and sits on that body's Banking Committee. Cordray was confirmed by the Senate after a lengthy confirmation battle in July 2013. Meanwhile, the broadness of CFPB's powers has been challenged by banking groups in court, and Republican lawmakers have introduced bills to eliminate CFPB or curtail its funding.

Am I now caught up?
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Amadeus is living proof of what I already knew about a lot of the Warren champions. They have no idea what it is she's proposed/proposing. I don't champion a politician's words when I admittedly don't understand them. When I do that, all I'm doing is bobbing my head in agreement with talking points, rhetoric, and pandering.

You said that Glass-Steagall was irrelevant to this conversation, and that the 2007-2008 crisis was irrelevant to Dodd-Frank. Why did you lie to me?
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

I think we're having the correct conversation.



...



Am I now caught up?

Sure, we're all caught up. Now that you read some paragraphs we can discuss. What do you want to start with?

RESPA
TILA-RESPA
The inclusion of the additional "A" in a very old regulation, and what it means to banks and consumers
QM
ATR

How about we start with the one with the "A". That's an interesting one for anyone who knows about regulations, the CFPB, Dodd-Frank, and the impact on the consumers. Now that you're all caught up, you should be good.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

You said that Glass-Steagall was irrelevant to this conversation, and that the 2007-2008 crisis was irrelevant to Dodd-Frank. Why did you lie to me?

Because I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about Elizabeth Warren and the CFPB going forward. I thought I made that perfectly clear. Do you need someone else to explain what I'm discussing? Maybe because you're not American you don't understand it, and because it wouldn't impact you, you don't need to understand it?
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Sure, we're all caught up. Now that you read some paragraphs we can discuss. What do you want to start with?

How regulations on banks prevent people from making decisions for themselves. Start there.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

How regulations on banks prevent people from making decisions for themselves. Start there.

No, you said you're all caught up, and you want to understand what I was saying. And since I never said whatever it is you have there (regulations on banks prevent people from making decisions for themselves - huh??), we need to go back to what I was talking about.

So what's your opinion on the inclusion of the "A", and what it means now and going forward?
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

And the legislative partying - that we were not invited to, BTW, but are expected to roll over and pay for - continues! :2mad:

Out for a while - I need some fresh air, so I'm going to do some work outside. Back later ....

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

Got you, Yesterday, today and tomorrow I am spending most of my time out at Wat Buddha Bucha. A big meeting, conference with monks from all over the U.S. is going on and I am helping. Like you I took a break this afternoon to take care of the doggies at home, I am going back to the Wat in a few minutes. So I shall see you either later on tonight or perhaps tomorrow night. Sunday is a full day schedule.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Because I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about Elizabeth Warren and the CFPB going forward. I thought I made that perfectly clear. Do you need someone else to explain what I'm discussing? Maybe because you're not American you don't understand it, and because it wouldn't impact you, you don't need to understand it?

Elizabeth Warren champions Glass-Steagall. Ergo, its fair game when talking about her. Or did you not know that?

tres borrachos is living proof that Warren haters are have no real argument. They hide behind a pretence of superior economic knowledge, but when pressed, they can't answer basic questions about their ridiculous statements.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Amadeus is living proof of what I already knew about a lot of the Warren champions. They have no idea what it is she's proposed/proposing. I don't champion a politician's words when I admittedly don't understand them. When I do that, all I'm doing is bobbing my head in agreement with talking points, rhetoric, and pandering.

Exactly, you got it and all of them do it. Some more than others. That reminds me of an old joke, How do you tell if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Elizabeth Warren champions Glass-Steagall. Ergo, its fair game when talking about her. Or did you not know that?

tres borrachos is living proof that Warren haters are have no real argument. They hide behind a pretence of superior economic knowledge, but when pressed, they can't answer basic questions about their ridiculous statements.

I'm not talking about GLB and the overturning of Glass Steagall. I'm not sure how many more times I can say that. If you want to discuss that, fine, but it has nothing to do with what *I* said about Warren.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

No, you said you're all caught up, and you want to understand what I was saying. And since I never said whatever it is you have there (regulations on banks prevent people from making decisions for themselves - huh??), we need to go back to what I was talking about.

What you said:

Warren IMO would be very dangerous for this country. She thinks people are too stupid to make smart decisions, and she believes that the government should make decisions for people. It's downright frightening.

Now answer. Or you can keep avoiding the question.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Exactly, you got it and all of them do it. Some more than others. That reminds me of an old joke, How do you tell if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

And they all lie, too. Isn't that sad? It's so frustrating.

Look, I get that they all want to keep their jobs, and move up the government food chain. Lots of people want to get ahead and stay ahead. Human nature, and all that.

But for civilian voters to blindly accept the stuff that's pushed at them without having any knowledge of the subject matter is as appalling as the politicians doing it.

Warren will do more damage to consumers than help. It may take 5-10 years for people to see it, but see it they will.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

What you said:



Now answer. Or you can keep avoiding the question.

Saying she thinks people are too stupid to think for themselves isn't the same thing as regulations prevent people from thinking for themselves. I have no clue where you connected them.

Look, you said you're not even American, so why would I bother educating you on what Warren's ideas will due to consumer access to credit in this country? It won't impact you, and you don't even have a fundamental and small understanding of the CFPB and the banking environment in the United States. It would be like me pretending to understand the Canadian banking system, or getting worked up about comments made that have no impact on me whatsoever.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Saying she thinks people are too stupid to think for themselves isn't the same thing as regulations prevent people from thinking for themselves. I have no clue where you connected them.

Seems we have disconnect. I'll just ask you plainly. Which decisions does Warren believe government should control? I don't need to have a black belt in economics to get a response to this question.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

I wouldn't vote for either, but if I had to I'd vote for Warren.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Seems we have disconnect. I'll just ask you plainly. Which decisions does Warren believe government should control? I don't need to have a black belt in economics to get a response to this question.

Well, even though we aren't specifically discussing this, here is something quick and very simplified (it is very complex). There is something she was behind called QM/ATR. It's a result of the people who foolishly overextended themselves on their mortgages. QM/ATR severely limits a bank's ability to make a 1-4 family first mortgage loan to consumers. So as time goes on, credit will be more and more scarce, and you will see cries of "we can't get a home loan anymore from our bank/credit union", and the small banks and credit unions will look like the bad guys. There is a very little percentage of Americans who are too dumb to make smart decisions, so Warren, believing that all Americans are too dumb to make smart decisions, have put processes in place in the banks that make it so that there are guidelines to determine what is a good loan versus what is a bad loan. Most Americans didn't get themselves into trouble with overextension and signing contracts for loans they had no chance of repaying. So to reduce everyone down to the lowest, dumbest denominator is what Warren has done, and because the regulatory burden is simply too cumbersome and too expensive for most of the 6800 or so small banks, they will likely go out of the residential lending business altogether, will become easy prey for large banks, or will have to pay enormous fines for not following the CFPB system. Credit will dry up, and homebuyers will suffer.

That is one very small and very oversimplified example.

By the way - you keep mentioning economics. I'm not an economist. This is about banking regulations, not the economy.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton

Got you, Yesterday, today and tomorrow I am spending most of my time out at Wat Buddha Bucha. A big meeting, conference with monks from all over the U.S. is going on and I am helping. Like you I took a break this afternoon to take care of the doggies at home, I am going back to the Wat in a few minutes. So I shall see you either later on tonight or perhaps tomorrow night. Sunday is a full day schedule.

How exciting! That's not something most people get to do! Have a great time, Pero. :thumbs:
 
Back
Top Bottom