• 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!

Regulation Business, Jobs Booming Under Obama

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
f the federal government's regulatory operation were a business, it would be one of the 50 biggest in the country in terms of revenues, and the third largest in terms of employees, with more people working for it than McDonald's, Ford, Disney and Boeing combined.
Under President Obama, while the economy is struggling to grow and create jobs, the federal regulatory business is booming.
Click to expand...

3A13c_110816.jpg

Better title would be "Where the jobs are"
 
And what does that graph look like from '05 - '08?
 
AdamT said:
And what does that graph look like from '05 - '08?
Click to expand...

I don't know, it wasn't part of the story, how about you find said graph and post it for comparison?
 
GPS_Flex said:
Are we looking to see if we can blame Bush some more?
Click to expand...

We don't really have to look very hard, do we? The financial crisis was brought on by a failure to adequately regulate the financial and real estate markets, and a failure to enforce existing regulations -- in part due to insufficient regulatory staff. Only in bizarro world would you conclude that the measures taken after the fact to address the causes of the worst recession in three generations are responsible for the fallout from that recession.
 
AdamT said:
We don't really have to look very hard, do we? The financial crisis was brought on by a failure to adequately regulate the financial and real estate markets, and a failure to enforce existing regulations -- in part due to insufficient regulatory staff. Only in bizarro world would you conclude that the measures taken after the fact to address the causes of the worst recession in three generations are responsible for the fallout from that recession.
Click to expand...


Someone forgets which party said "Hey we need to do something about this" and the party that said "No problem here"...

 
F&F, or even F were nto the only or even largest problem. Nor are regulations.
 
MrVicchio said:
Someone forgets which party said "Hey we need to do something about this" and the party that said "No problem here"...
Click to expand...

Actually the House, in a bipartisan effort aided by Barney Frank, actually passed a bill to reform Freddie and Fannie, but it was killed by Republicans in the Senate at the insistance of the White House.

FT.com / UK - Oxley hits back at ideologues
 
AdamT said:
Actually the House, in a bipartisan effort aided by Barney Frank, actually passed a bill to reform Freddie and Fannie, but it was killed by Republicans in the Senate at the insistance of the White House.

FT.com / UK - Oxley hits back at ideologues
Click to expand...

In 2005, Republican Mike Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, brought up a reform bill (H.R. 1461), and Fannie and Freddie's lobbyists set out to weaken it. The bill was rendered so toothless that Card called Oxley the night before markup and promised to oppose it. Oxley pulled the bill instead.

During this period, Sen. Richard Shelby led a small group of legislators favoring reform, including fellow Republican Sens. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel and Elizabeth Dole. Meanwhile, Dodd -- who along with Democratic Sens. John Kerry, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the top four recipients of Fannie and Freddie campaign contributions from 1988 to 2008 -- actively opposed such measures and further weakened existing regulation
Click to expand...

Al Hubbard and Noam Neusner - Where Was Sen. Dodd?


Thinks someone should get all the facts before posting things that are half false. This bill was pulled from the floor, it was never voted upon. There for claiming it was killed by the white house is just an outright lie
 
AdamT said:
We don't really have to look very hard, do we? The financial crisis was brought on by a failure to adequately regulate the financial and real estate markets, and a failure to enforce existing regulations -- in part due to insufficient regulatory staff. Only in bizarro world would you conclude that the measures taken after the fact to address the causes of the worst recession in three generations are responsible for the fallout from that recession.
Click to expand...

It is only the worst recession in 3 generations because Obama made things worse rather than better.

I think Bush was a complete dill-weed and a horrible president. This doesn’t mean he is/was the cause of the double dip recession we are going into.

Obama owns this recession just as Bush owned the recession Clinton left for him and still owned it following 9/11.

Americans don’t buy the snake oil you are selling. It isn’t like we don’t already know that Obama will blame anyone and everything before he will ever get real and tell us how things really are. How can you trust a man who claims the house isn’t on fire when people are jumping out of the windows all around him and the smoke is choking you?

Obama didn’t cause the slump we are in but I think he made it worse. You can argue with me on this. You can’t argue that he made things better though because things aren’t better. You can’t argue that it would have been a lot worse if it weren’t for Obama because he didn’t run on “It will be bad but I’ll keep it from being worse”, he ran on and talked tall crap about how he was going to fix this mess.

Maybe he wasn’t paying attention to the economy as a US Senator or candidate for President and it caught him off guard. Who knows?

What we do know is that he can’t deliver the change we can believe in because he is too bust blaming others for the change he can’t believe in.
 
Fannie and Freddy did not make these bad mortgages. They backed them as derivatives, thats bad but not nearly as bad as the actual banks. It was the banks who were actually giving out the bad loans. If the banks dont give out bad loans F&F are not only ok but profitable.
 
GPS_Flex said:
It is only the worst recession in 3 generations because Obama made things worse rather than better.

I think Bush was a complete dill-weed and a horrible president. This doesn’t mean he is/was the cause of the double dip recession we are going into.

Obama owns this recession just as Bush owned the recession Clinton left for him and still owned it following 9/11.

Americans don’t buy the snake oil you are selling. It isn’t like we don’t already know that Obama will blame anyone and everything before he will ever get real and tell us how things really are. How can you trust a man who claims the house isn’t on fire when people are jumping out of the windows all around him and the smoke is choking you?

Obama didn’t cause the slump we are in but I think he made it worse. You can argue with me on this. You can’t argue that he made things better though because things aren’t better. You can’t argue that it would have been a lot worse if it weren’t for Obama because he didn’t run on “It will be bad but I’ll keep it from being worse”, he ran on and talked tall crap about how he was going to fix this mess.

Maybe he wasn’t paying attention to the economy as a US Senator or candidate for President and it caught him off guard. Who knows?

What we do know is that he can’t deliver the change we can believe in because he is too bust blaming others for the change he can’t believe in.
Click to expand...

Even Rasmussen, which is biased pretty heavily towards conservatives in its models disagrees with your assessment on the stance of the public

49% Blame Bad Economy on Bush's Recession, 44% on Obama's Policies - Rasmussen Reports™
 
MrVicchio said:
Someone forgets which party said "Hey we need to do something about this" and the party that said "No problem here"...

Click to expand...


Congratulations for finding this video that clearly contradicts what Obama and many other Liberals have been claiming about President Bush for the last couple of years.

It's too bad someone didn't point out all this information before the last election, but then McCain would be in office and we might not be very much better off than we are. However we would be a little better off because Obama has been a disaster from the get go.
 
GPS_Flex said:
I prefer this more recent Gallup poll that shows 71% disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy while only 26% approve. I think it supports my assessment quite well.
Click to expand...
I forgot to post my link.
 
The Barbarian said:


Al Hubbard and Noam Neusner - Where Was Sen. Dodd?


Thinks someone should get all the facts before posting things that are half false. This bill was pulled from the floor, it was never voted upon. There for claiming it was killed by the white house is just an outright lie
Click to expand...

Thinks someone does not know how Congress works.... It is common practice to pull a bill before a vote when a head count reveals that the votes are not there.
 
AdamT said:
Thinks someone does not know how Congress works.... It is common practice to pull a bill before a vote when a head count reveals that the votes are not there.
Click to expand...

And this supports your original point how? The version Frank wanted to pass wouldn't do squat to fix the issue. Frank and most of the democrats wouldn't support the bill that eventually passed in 2007 because he felt it went too far. Looks like Frank has been on the wrong side of history more often than not.

Bush drropped the ball by not leading more forcefully on this issue but he did try, a little, to do something about it before the chickens came home to roost. Smells like chicken **** everywhere you go now doesn't it?
 
You guys are arguing over a bill that would not have stopped the housing crisis anyway. F&F were not giving out the bad mortgages. Even with a strict regulation bill the problem would not have been avoided. Should we have passed a better reform bill; YES. Would it have prevented this economic crisis;NO. They simply had little to do with the bad loans that were given out.
 
When you want to replace a system with another the first thing you do is point out the flaws in the current one. If there are no flaws or few of them you have to create the appearance that there are many, and the best way to do that is to invent problems that were not there by regulations that will make what ever the status guo was into a problem.

Obama is about doing that vary thing with regulatory systems that will fit the mold he wishes to portray as an impediment to prosperity when the truth id he is about doing the opposite.

I see it all the time how he tells his base of blind followers one thing to gain their support and in the shadows he is really working against the vary thing he says he is trying to accomplish.

It's classic bate and switch but the Obamaniacs are so invested in this Anti-American they can't see past his last batch of lies they fell for.

Obama is not just a liar he's a damn liar.

I have plenty more to say on the subject but suffice to say create unreasonable regulations that are impossible to achieve and say see I told you so. We need more regulations.

What that does is kill jobs and growth which is what I see is Obama's goal.

He was raised by a communist mother, father, stepfather, grandparents, then spent 20 years immersed in Black Liberation Theology that has it's roots in Marxism and what do you expect.
 
Councilman said:
When you want to replace a system with another the first thing you do is point out the flaws in the current one. If there are no flaws or few of them you have to create the appearance that there are many, and the best way to do that is to invent problems that were not there by regulations that will make what ever the status guo was into a problem.

Obama is about doing that vary thing with regulatory systems that will fit the mold he wishes to portray as an impediment to prosperity when the truth id he is about doing the opposite.

I see it all the time how he tells his base of blind followers one thing to gain their support and in the shadows he is really working against the vary thing he says he is trying to accomplish.

It's classic bate and switch but the Obamaniacs are so invested in this Anti-American they can't see past his last batch of lies they fell for.

Obama is not just a liar he's a damn liar.

I have plenty more to say on the subject but suffice to say create unreasonable regulations that are impossible to achieve and say see I told you so. We need more regulations.

What that does is kill jobs and growth which is what I see is Obama's goal.

He was raised by a communist mother, father, stepfather, grandparents, then spent 20 years immersed in Black Liberation Theology that has it's roots in Marxism and what do you expect.
Click to expand...

Can you give some specific examples of these unreasonable regulations?
 
GPS_Flex said:
And this supports your original point how? The version Frank wanted to pass wouldn't do squat to fix the issue. Frank and most of the democrats wouldn't support the bill that eventually passed in 2007 because he felt it went too far. Looks like Frank has been on the wrong side of history more often than not.

Bush drropped the ball by not leading more forcefully on this issue but he did try, a little, to do something about it before the chickens came home to roost. Smells like chicken **** everywhere you go now doesn't it?
Click to expand...

That was not the conclusion of Republican Congressman, Mike Oxley, the chairman of the Committee on Financial Services who championed (and helped pass) the 2005 reform bill. He has stated that the '05 bill would have made a significant difference re: F&F, and he stated that the bill was killed due to resistance from the Bush White House and Alan Greenspan.

"Oxley hits back at ideologues
By Greg Farrell in New York
Published: September 9 2008 19:25 | Last updated: September 9 2008 19:25

In the aftermath of the US Treasury’s decision to seize control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, critics have hit at lax oversight of the mortgage companies.

The dominant theme has been that Congress let the two government-sponsored enterprises morph into a creature that eventually threatened the US financial system. Mike Oxley will have none of it.

Instead, the Ohio Republican who headed the House financial services committee until his retirement after mid-term elections last year, blames the mess on ideologues within the White House as well as Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve.

The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley, now vice-chairman of Nasdaq.

He fumes about the criticism of his House colleagues. “All the handwringing and bedwetting is going on without remembering how the House stepped up on this,” he says. “What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”

The House bill, the 2005 Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, would have created a stronger regulator with new powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, to limit their portfolios and to deal with the possibility of receivership.

Mr Oxley reached out to Barney Frank, then the ranking Democrat on the committee and now its chairman, to secure support on the other side of the aisle. But after winning bipartisan support in the House, where the bill passed by 331 to 90 votes, the legislation lacked a champion in the Senate and faced hostility from the Bush administration.

Adamant that the only solution to the problems posed by Fannie and Freddie was their privatisation, the White House attacked the bill. Mr Greenspan also weighed in, saying that the House legislation was worse than no bill at all.

“We missed a golden opportunity that would have avoided a lot of the problems we’re facing now, if we hadn’t had such a firm ideological position at the White House and the Treasury and the Fed,” Mr Oxley says.

When Hank Paulson joined the administration as Treasury secretary in 2006 he sent emissaries to Capitol Hill to explore the possibility of reaching a compromise, but to no avail."

FT.com / UK - Oxley hits back at ideologues
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom