Spring Slowdown Paints Ugly Picture For Jobs: ADP

Taylor said:

Yes, yes they are:

Treasury to pay down debt for first time since Obama took office - The Hill's On The Money

Click to expand...

That has as at least much to do with the tax increases and higher revenue as the sequester.

Moot said:

No doubt the GOP would prefer a uneducated population since the polls show thats who votes for them.

Click to expand...

Hah hah, no.

Oh the irony...

Fenton said:

Do you make this up as you go along ? Texas is HIRING, and we're hiring Californians and Ganders. People and families that had to run away from their blue plague states because their idiot politicians pushed a corrupt ideology.

Hows Obama's economy working out for you ?

Let me guess, thats not his fault either.

Click to expand...

I note that Texas was hiring folks to work in an unsafe fertilizer plant. How did that work out for ya?


"...The Texas GOP has set itself explicitly against teaching children to be critical thinkers. Never mind the creeping stupidization of this country, the growing dumbification of our children, our mounting rejection of, even contempt for, objective fact. Never mind educators who lament the inability of American children to think, to weigh conflicting paradigms, analyze competing arguments, to reason, ruminate, question and reach a thoughtful conclusion. Never mind that this promises the loss of our ability to compete in an ever more complex and technology-driven world.

Never mind. The Texas branch of one of our two major political parties opposes teaching critical thinking skills or anything that might challenge a child’s “fixed beliefs.” So presumably, if a child is of the “fixed belief” that Jesus was the first president of the United States or that 2+2 = apple trees or that Florida is an island in an ocean on the moon, educators ought not correct the little genius lest she (gasp!) change her “fixed belief,” thereby undermining mom and dad.
That’s just…just…....Holy wow.

For what it’s worth, the Texas GOP says that language was not supposed to be in the platform. Spokesman Chris Elam says its inclusion “was an oversight on the subcommittee’s part.”

If that explanation leaves you cold, join the club. That such an asinine position was even under consideration is hardly comforting. And the fact that something so neon stupid escaped notice of both the subcommittee and the full platform committee suggests the Texas GOP could use a little critical thinking instruction itself.

Read more here: Dumbing down America one child at a time - Leonard Pitts Jr. - MiamiHerald.com

Moot said:

I note that Texas was hiring folks to work in an unsafe fertilizer plant. How did that work out for ya?

Click to expand...

When you set out to argue that Democrat supporters are smarter than Republican supporters it would be wise to try a little harder to not sound like an idiot.

Moot said:

...The Texas GOP has set itself explicitly against teaching children to be critical thinkers. Never mind the creeping stupidization of this country, the growing dumbification of our children,

Click to expand...

I wonder if Texas is successful in teaching their children basic language skills so that they don't make fools of themselves by using "words" like 'stupidization' and 'dumbification?'

Back when I ran a company (well, two, actually--I've had my own business, and was in upper management at another, though not at the same time) I followed a pretty simple formula: If I had a need that could be translated as a job, I hired someone to fulfill that need. My labor needs were generated by my custom; if I was selling product and demand was up, I had more work for people to do and so I hired more. This, in turn, depended on my customers having enough money to buy the products I was selling.

Simple as that.

When policies are such that middle-income-or-below workers' wages remain stagnant for decades, but massive wealth accumulates at the top, the outcome is a falling death-spiral of demand. We're seeing the results of those policies, which have been enacted by both democrats and republicans, over the course of the last few decades. I think it is fair to say that republicans identify more readily with the ideas behind those policies, and also that republicans started the country on the track of following those policies. But democrats have been complicit, and basically followed the program. One is really no better than the other.

jmotivator said:

Hah hah, no.

Oh the irony...

Click to expand...

Hmm, I checked the Census data the author in your link claims to have used and it didn't seem to match the conclusions he made. Nor did the Cook Report. Here check for yourself.....

Cook Partisan Voting Index

2006-2008 American Community Survey (ACS)


From The Pew Research Center .......

"...The Pew Research Center released data in August 2012 about GOP gains among working-class white voters that found: "Lower-income and less educated whites also have shifted substantially toward the Republican Party since 2008

Among whites without a college degree, the GOP now holds a 54 percent to 37 percent advantage among non-college whites, who were split about evenly four years ago. The partisanship of white college graduates, by contrast, has not changed, the analysis found.

To reach the conclusions, the political scientists (professors at East Coast colleges such as George Washington University and Georgetown) used data from Annenberg pre-election polls for 2000 and 2004 and Pew pre-election polls for 2008...read
PolitiFact Georgia | Is education level tied to voting tendencies?

Blue_State said:

False false and false...

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/07/weekinreview/20101107-detailed-exitpolls.html?_r=0

Refer to this chart.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/weekinreview/20101107-rightward-march-poll-graphic.pdf

High school grad, some college and college grad were all won by a 8% margin.

Not graduating from high school and post grad won by dems. 22% swing for those not graduating high school to dems. 4% swing for those with a post grad education.

Click to expand...

Gerrymandering aside, 2010 wasn't a national election year and it was at the height of the tea party movement. But now that the tea party has proven themselves too extreme, do you have any charts for 2012?

jmotivator said:

When you set out to argue that Democrat supporters are smarter than Republican supporters it would be wise to try a little harder to not sound like an idiot.

Click to expand...

Is that so? You posted an unverifiable chart by unknown author from the height of the tea party movement and think that somehow proves your point? It doesn't, in fact it actually proved my point and showed just how easily some Americans can be dumbed down with lies and propaganda.

Oh, it's not all bad:

First-time claims for unemployment benefits fell to their lowest level in five years last week, signaling fewer layoffs in the economy.

Click to expand...

Jobless claims fall to 5-year low - May. 2, 2013

Fenton said:

Right. No we don't appeal to the Beyonce and Jay-Z idiots, the "Obama-Phones Lady", the racist who vote for him because he's black, the perpetually stoned, drunk and addicted low lifes who believed his lies.

No, by definition a Obama voter is a idiot. Low information, gullible and suceptable to a corrupt ideology.

Click to expand...

No, you appeal to an old white man who talks to an empty chair, an actor famous for fake fighting on a television series, and the backwoods racist Jethros who spend more money on beer and bug zappers than on their trailer home.

Aren't generalizations based on a few fun?

Moot said:

From The Pew Research Center .......

"...The Pew Research Center released data in August 2012 about GOP gains among working-class white voters that found: "Lower-income and less educated whites also have shifted substantially toward the Republican Party since 2008

Click to expand...

Would that be the same Pew Research Center that consistently says things like:

"Republicans fare substantially better than Democrats on several questions in the survey, as is typically the case in surveys about political knowledge."

"Republicans did somewhat better than Democrats on average."

"Republicans, on average, answered one more question correctly than Democrats (5.9 vs. 4.9 correct). These differences are partly a reflection of the demographics of the two groups; Republicans tend to be older, well educated and male, which are characteristics associated with political and economic knowledge. Still, even when these factors are held constant, Republicans do somewhat better than Democrats on the knowledge quiz."

Fenton said:

Construction on WHAT Rob ? You looking for a mass upswing in housing ? Commercial ?

The entire real estate market is floating in a sea of debt due to the Democrat mandates sub-prime bubble.

Click to expand...

Home prices rose 9% in February. Thats the largest increase since 2007 and it's not even the peak of home buying season yet.

FYI, Bush had a home buying mandate and the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates to 1% under his watch. There wouldn't have been housing bubble without those lower interest rates or big banks bundling up predator loans and giving them A+ ratings. It was Bush's appointee, Sec. Henry Paulson, ex CEO of Goldman Sachs who threatened to tank the economy if the taxpayers didn't bail out the banks.

Taylor said:

Would that be the same Pew Research Center that consistently says things like:

"Republicans fare substantially better than Democrats on several questions in the survey, as is typically the case in surveys about political knowledge."

"Republicans did somewhat better than Democrats on average."

"Republicans, on average, answered one more question correctly than Democrats (5.9 vs. 4.9 correct). These differences are partly a reflection of the demographics of the two groups; Republicans tend to be older, well educated and male, which are characteristics associated with political and economic knowledge. Still, even when these factors are held constant, Republicans do somewhat better than Democrats on the knowledge quiz."

Click to expand...

Things written or said can be easily taken out of context and since you didn't provide a link, I really can't say what the Pew Research Center consistently says.

Moot said:

Home prices rose 9% in February. That's the largest increase since 2007 and it's not even the peak of home buying season yet.

FYI, Bush had a home buying mandate and the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates to 1% under his watch. There wouldn't have been housing bubble without those lower interest rates or big banks bundling up predator loans and giving them A+ ratings. It was Bush's appointee, Sec. Henry Paulson, ex CEO of Goldman Sachs who threatened to tank the economy if the taxpayers didn't bail out the banks.

Click to expand...

Ah I see, your problem is that you have NO IDEA of what the hell it is your'e talking about. But then again, your'e a Liberal for a reason.

First, the sub-prime bubble was built exclusively by Clinton's 1995 Affordable Home Owners Strategy as it lowered capital requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to 3% and put them under the regulatory authority of HUD which enforced a climbing scale of quota's. That is the percentage of loans purchased by the GSE's HAD to be low quality and by 2000 it was up to 50%.

In 1994 Clinton signed the Riegle Neal Act, which tied a banks CRA score to whether or not they could acquire new acquisitions, grow into new territories. Clinton's 1995 Affordable Home Owners Strategy also beefed up CRA requirements by now forcing targets implementation on CRA loans. For our Liberal friends that means for the first time since the 1997 CRA was initiated, banks HAD TO loan to people in the communities they served who were at or below 80% of the median income rate IN THAT COMMUNITY. Thus began the sub-prime loan.

Janet Reno to banks after the Affordable Home Owners imitative was implemented..." For those who thumb their nose at us we promise rigorous enforcement", " 'No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,' Hmmmm....

There CRA scores were published so Community organizers like Obama and ACORN could file law suites and threaten them in general if they did not roll over. The National Bureau of Economic Research looked into the matter...Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?

But aside from that Clinton needed criminals he could count on so from 1993 to 1998 he replaced all of Fannie and Freddie's top Executives and over half of the board members. One in particular who was the CEO of Fannie Mae misreported billions in earnings so he could meet executive target bonus's.

In 2000 the HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo pledged 2 TRILLION dollars to buy up affordable home loans. He's speaking for the corrupted GSEs since Fannie and Fredddie were under HUD Regulatory control to purchase and increasing number of toxic debt by way of sub-prime, Alt-A loans.

You guys gave him a Governorship for his stupidity....:lamo

In 1997 Fannie securitized it's first sub-prime loan. Prior to 1997 Fannie and Freddie wouldn't touch CRA, Alt-A trash with a 10 foot pole, it was against their charter to buy bad debt, and for almost 70 years it worked, until their charter and mission was changed by the Democrats and they started buying, bundling bad with good and started pushing toxic mortgage Backed Securities into the world Financial Markets to fund the new secondary market. They were AAA rated because American Treasuries were triple rated and it was understood these securities would be backed by the US Treasury if something happened.

Clinton's appointee Jamie Gorelick in 2000 at a banking Congress in San Fransisco.." We want to buy your CRA loans because it helps us meet our affordable housing mandate " " We will buy them from your portfolios, and turn them into Securities "

But, since the Democrats forced the banks to lower their standards, and as they understood that these loans over enough time would bankrupt any lender, they realized in order to make available 6 trillion dollars in easy credit backed by the tax payer, they would need a guaranteed BUYER of those loans.

Well Fannie bought over 70 % of Country-Wide's loans, as Country-Wide gave Democrat politicians like CHRIS DODD inside sweetheart deals on personal loans. The CEO of Country-Wide, Angelo Mozilo, was a corrupt Democrat, selling worthless mortgages to another corrupt Democrat, Franklin Raines.

Oh yea, we need to ignore all of that, because corrupt Democrats who ripped off the American public for TRILLIONS as over 5 trillion of GSE debt sits on the Treasury's books.

Time for you to educate yourself, just in general. The one thing common with people on the left is their lack of knowledge and that their susceptible to nonsense and dishonest narratives.

Bush, upon election almost immediately tried to create a regulatory panel to oversee Fannie and Freddie's corruption. New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - NYTimes.com

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.


The Democrats weren't having it, and 27 of them signed a letter warning Bush not to screw with Fannie and Freddie.

cont....

Bush and the Republicans continued, and replaced Fannie and Freddies AUDITOR. You realize they shared the same auditor that was responsible for keeping an eye on ENRON right ? Well Bush stopped that low life behavior and appointed Price Water-house Cooper to look into Franklin Raines accounting "techniques". As it turned out he misreported BILLIONS in earnings to meet his executive bonus targets, and argued for even lower Capital Requirement Standards on Sub-Prime Loans from 3% down to 2%.



In 2004 Bush's HUD Secretary Mel Martinez was able to increase the Capital Requirements on loans bought by Fannie Mae to 10% but by 2004 Fannie Mae also held ownership of over 40% of private MBSs.

Throughout Bush's presidency he and the Republicans tried to appoint regulatory boards over the run-away GSEs, and held committee's in an attempt to understand the level of corruption that the Democrats were responsible for. In 2005 McCain introduced a bill into committee that would have placed severe restrictions on Fannie and Freddie, the only problem was the Democrats were threatening to filibuster it, and the Republicans needed 5 Democrats votes in the Senate to make it Filibuster proof.

Not one Democrat stepped up to pass the needed reform as the sub-prime collapse neared. In 2007 it was re-introduced but into a Democrat chaired committee. It never left committee.

So do yourself a favor, don't try that blame Bush nonsense on me. I'm not a Obama voter and I'm not susceptible to BULL SH**.

The White House released this list of attempts by President Bush to reform
Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac since he took office in 2001.
Unfortunately, Congress did not act on the president's warnings:


** 2001

April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a
large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting
Federally insured entities and economic activity."

** 2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance
principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to
apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

** 2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the
previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO)
releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit
Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no
explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a
GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing
market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,"
OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's
review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial
Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a
new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our
housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and
appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

ovember: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw
explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the
new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic
risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would
have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards"
and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled
GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank
Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

** 2004

February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the
explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and
called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has
determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack
sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and
therefore?should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005
Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial
market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was
to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an
effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And
Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed
by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class
system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises
(GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the
GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality
of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first
class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie
Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House
Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony,
6/16/04)

** 2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying
"Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003
reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further
highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance
system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding
homeownership opportunities in America? Half-measures will only exacerbate
the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony
Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

** 2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform
package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it
comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get
them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options."
(President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August *
up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the
previous month * the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of
existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass
legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in
the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital
they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass
legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs * and
ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill
passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has
not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation
soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House,
12/6/07)

** 2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms,
says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these
entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully."
(David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On
Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward
with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to
modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free
bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W.
Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and
"modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things
Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by
? helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting
With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation
reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates
further.

"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping
their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly
requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help
more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to
ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies
to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W.
Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their
homes. And one way we can do that * and Congress is making progress on this
is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a
strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The
Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing
Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on
their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free
bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio
Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the
President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address
this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For
Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are
failing.

In 2005-- Senator John McCain partnered with three other Senate Republicans
to reform the government¹s involvement in lending.
Democrats blocked this reform, too.

Slyfox696 said:

Oh, it's not all bad:

Jobless claims fall to 5-year low - May. 2, 2013

No, you appeal to an old white man who talks to an empty chair, an actor famous for fake fighting on a television series, and the backwoods racist Jethros who spend more money on beer and bug zappers than on their trailer home.

Aren't generalizations based on a few fun?

Click to expand...

LOL, you guys go ahead and waste your time destroying the economy and repeating these nonsensical stero-types.

And BTW, those "Jethro's" are far more likely to be Democrats. I mean you guys DID threaten to Filibuster the Civil Rights Act.

Blue_State said:

I was just about to post that. Construction is way down right now, but we had hell of a winter across the nation. We went from twiddling our thumbs to breakneck speed overnight. It is nice to be busy again.

And we started hiring again. White and Blue.

Click to expand...

I did general contracting for the last three years and you could see it picking up in that time. It was a lot of small repairs that people had obviously put off for a while and then the smaller repairs gave way to bigger repairs that gave way to additions and renovations. Now I work at a large plumbing supply store and it's picking up there quite a bit. I didn't replace anyone they just brought me on because of the uptick in biz.

Fenton said:

a Obama voter is a idiot.

Click to expand...

Hilarious. And I'm nowhere near a grammar nazi.

poweRob said:

Hilarious.

Click to expand...

Well ROB, they're either AN idiot, or they're so ideologically bind and devoid of humility that they are going to back a ideology that's responsible for 20 million more people on the food stamp roles, a rise in poverty to record levels, consumer confidence at 30 year lows, disability roles doubling and record debt and deficit as our Central Bank is stuck on stupid forced into perpetual QE.

So go ahead, cherry pick my mistakes, but one things clear, you'll stay 10 miles away from the issues because you have nothing substantial to add.

Fenton said:

Well ROB, they're either AN idiot, or they're so ideologically bind and devoid of humility that they are going to back a ideology that's responsible for 20 million more people on the food stamp roles, a rise in poverty to record levels, consumer confidence at 30 year lows, disability roles doubling and record debt and deficit as our Central Bank is stuck on stupid forced into perpetual QE.

So go ahead, cherry pick my mistakes, but one things clear, you'll stay 10 miles away from the issues because you have nothing substantial to add.

Click to expand...

You apparently don't read my posts much. If you just read the ones where I reply to your posts, they tend to be a mirror image of the "substantial" content I'm replying to. I mean who could possibly argue with the deep "substantial" statements like:

Fenton said:

Ah I see, your problem is that you have NO IDEA of what the hell it is your'e talking about. But then again, your'e a Liberal for a reason.

Click to expand...

Fenton said:

Right. No we don't appeal to the Beyonce and Jay-Z idiots, the "Obama-Phones Lady", the racist who vote for him because he's black, the perpetually stoned, drunk and addicted low lifes who believed his lies.

No, by definition a Obama voter is a idiot. Low information, gullible and suceptable to a corrupt ideology.

Click to expand...

That's some real deep stuff there man.

The stuff of yours that actually has some content in it is cut and paste ideologically driven bull that so many people have debunked a zillion times that laughing at it is much more fun and even more productive than trying to persuade you of anything that wasn't spoon-fed to you by Glenn Beck or Roger Ailes. So go ahead on fixing the facts around your preset conclusions so that your perfect world of looking down you nose on anyone who doesn't buy your jargon doesn't fall apart.

Fenton said:

Ah I see, your problem is that you have NO IDEA of what the hell it is your'e talking about. But then again, your'e a Liberal for a reason.

Click to expand...

No, you don't see the problem and that's is your biggest problem.

First, the sub-prime bubble was built exclusively by Clinton's 1995 Affordable Home Owners Strategy as it lowered capital requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to 3% and put them under the regulatory authority of HUD which enforced a climbing scale of quota's. That is the percentage of loans purchased by the GSE's HAD to be low quality and by 2000 it was up to 50%.

Click to expand...

In spite of not requiring a down payment, few low income earners could afford a mortgage in the 1990s because of the high interest rates applied to the loan. Do you know what the interest rates on a 30 year loan in 1995 was? It was around 8%.

In 1994 Clinton signed the Riegle Neal Act, which tied a banks CRA score to whether or not they could acquire new acquisitions, grow into new territories. Clinton's 1995 Affordable Home Owners Strategy also beefed up CRA requirements by now forcing targets implementation on CRA loans. For our Liberal friends that means for the first time since the 1997 CRA was initiated, banks HAD TO loan to people in the communities they served who were at or below 80% of the median income rate IN THAT COMMUNITY. Thus began the sub-prime loan.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't mean that at all. The Riegle Neal Act simply allowed a bank that was adequately capitalized and managed, to merge or purchase a similar bank in another state.....

ACQUISITION OF BANKS- The Board may approve an application under this section by a bank holding company that is adequately capitalized and adequately managed to acquire control of, or acquire all or substantially all of the assets of, a bank located in a State other than the home State of such bank holding company, without regard to whether such transaction is prohibited under the law of any State.Text of H.R. 3841 (103rd): Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (Passed Congress/Enrolled Bill version) - GovTrack.us

Janet Reno to banks after the Affordable Home Owners imitative was implemented..." For those who thumb their nose at us we promise rigorous enforcement", " 'No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,' Hmmmm....

Click to expand...

It's the Attorney General's job to enforce the laws made by congress and as such it was Reno's job to go after people who violated the law. Why is that a problem for you, Fenton?

There CRA scores were published so Community organizers like Obama and ACORN could file law suites and threaten them in general if they did not roll over. The National Bureau of Economic Research looked into the matter...Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?

Click to expand...

Since it helped expose and end the practice of RED LINING then I'm all for it. Black people are US citizens and deserve the same Constitutional protection to exercise their rights as white people do.

Redlining - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But aside from that Clinton needed criminals he could count on so from 1993 to 1998 he replaced all of Fannie and Freddie's top Executives and over half of the board members. One in particular who was the CEO of Fannie Mae misreported billions in earnings so he could meet executive target bonus's. In 2000 the HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo pledged 2 TRILLION dollars to buy up affordable home loans. He's speaking for the corrupted GSEs since Fannie and Freddie were under HUD Regulatory control to purchase and increasing number of toxic debt by way of sub-prime, Alt-A loans.

Click to expand...

Bush was president for eight years and he had six years of GOP "rubber stamp" controlled Senate and House. The housing bubble actually started under their watch, so instead of making it worse, why didn't they fix the problem when they had the chance? Because they were too busy trying to bankrupt the country, thats why.

You guys gave him a Governorship for his stupidity....:lamo

Click to expand...

Pffft, if you think thats bad you should get a load of Bush's HUD appointment.....
Jackson Resigns as HUD Secretary - Washington Post

In 1997 Fannie securitized it's first sub-prime loan. Prior to 1997 Fannie and Freddie wouldn't touch CRA, Alt-A trash with a 10 foot pole, it was against their charter to buy bad debt, and for almost 70 years it worked, until their charter and mission was changed by the Democrats and they started buying, bundling bad with good and started pushing toxic mortgage Backed Securities into the world Financial Markets to fund the new secondary market. They were AAA rated because American Treasuries were triple rated and it was understood these securities would be backed by the US Treasury if something happened.

Click to expand...

And yet, Democrats didn't control congress in 1997, Republicans did.

Clinton's appointee Jamie Gorelick in 2000 at a banking Congress in San Fransisco.." We want to buy your CRA loans because it helps us meet our affordable housing mandate " " We will buy them from your portfolios, and turn them into Securities "

But, since the Democrats forced the banks to lower their standards, and as they understood that these loans over enough time would bankrupt any lender, they realized in order to make available 6 trillion dollars in easy credit backed by the tax payer, they would need a guaranteed BUYER of those loans. Well Fannie bought over 70 % of Country-Wide's loans, as Country-Wide gave Democrat politicians like CHRIS DODD inside sweetheart deals on personal loans. The CEO of Country-Wide, Angelo Mozilo, was a corrupt Democrat, selling worthless mortgages to another corrupt Democrat, Franklin Raines.

Click to expand...

Too bad for you because history will tell a different story......

"...The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) completed its analysis [15] of the financial crisis and found that the GSE's "contributed to the crisis, but were not a primary cause."....The FCIC found that the GSE's were late to the subprime lending game, entering the market in a substantial way in 2005.....The GSE's followed rather than led the race to purchase subprime loan securities. .....The GSE's increased their involvement in the subprime securitization market because they were significantly losing market share and were feeling less relevant in the mortgage lending marketplace..... In accordance with the mission of Fannie Mae to enable home ownership by a greater proportion of the population, Franklin Raines, while Chairman and CEO, began a pilot program in 1999 to issue bank loans to individuals with low to moderate income, and to ease credit requirements on loans that Fannie Mae purchased from banks. Raines promoted the program saying that it would allow consumers who were "a notch below what our current underwriting has required" to get home loans. The move was intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners.

While the Fannie Mae pilot program described above sought to expand housing opportunities for under-served consumers, these loans did not result in major losses and performed significantly better than private label subprime loans. Phil Angelides, the Chair of the FCIC commented that ". . .the FCIC analyzed the performance of roughly 25 million mortgages outstanding at the end of each year from 2006 to 2009, and found that delinquency rates for the loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac purchased or guaranteed were substantially lower than for mortgages securitized by other financial firms. This holds true even for loans to borrowers with similar credit scores or down payments.

For example, data compiled by the FCIC for a subset of borrowers with scores below 660 shows that by the end of 2008, far fewer GSE mortgages were seriously delinquent than non-GSE securitized mortgages: 6.2 percent versus 28.3 percent." [14] Although under Raines, Fannie Mae invested in some securities backed by subprime loans, it didn't start buying subprime and Alt-A loans directly (and bundling them into securities) until late 2004 after the accounting scandal. Purchasing of subprime and alt-A mortgages expanded under the guidance of Raines's successor Daniel H. Mudd....read14. ^ a b Angelides, Phil (August 3, 2011). "Fannie, Freddie and the Financial Crisis: Phil Angelides". Bloomberg.
15.^ Get the Report : Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
16.^ Holmes, Steven A. (September 30, 1999). "Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending". The New York Times. Retrieved May 2, 2010.
17.^ The Real Culprits In This Meltdown, Investors Business Daily, September 15, 2008. [3]
18.^ Fannie's Perilous Pursuit of Subprime Loans, Washington Post, August 19, 2008.[4]
19.^ Blame Fannie Mae and Congress For the Credit Mess, Wall Street Journal, September 23, 2008.[5]

Whoa ho ho, that just tossed your entire pathetic biased argument right into the garbage...where it belongs.

Oh yea, we need to ignore all of that, because corrupt Democrats who ripped off the American public for TRILLIONS as over 5 trillion of GSE debt sits on the Treasury's books.

Time for you to educate yourself, just in general. The one thing common with people on the left is their lack of knowledge and that their susceptible to nonsense and dishonest narratives.

Click to expand...

I know that you don't know as much as you think you do.

Bush, upon election almost immediately tried to create a regulatory panel to oversee Fannie and Freddie's corruption. New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - NYTimes.com

Click to expand...

Did you read past the first paragraph of the NYT article that you posted, Fenton? Apparently not or you probably wouldn't have posted it. It says that Bush's proposal was a joke and his Sec of Treasury, John W. Snow recommended to congress that the President have his authority to appoint directors be "eliminated"......ROTFL

"...Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan..<snip>.. said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies...<snip>....

"...The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws....read New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - NYTimes.com

The Democrats weren't having it, and 27 of them signed a letter warning Bush not to screw with Fannie and Freddie.

Click to expand...

Turns out they were right...Bush had done enough damage to last for generations.

Read it and weep, Fenton....
http://fcic-static.law.stanford.edu/cdn_media/fcic-reports/fcic_final_report_conclusions.pdf

Moot said:

Obamacare hasn't kicked in yet and some states aren't even going to participate. So if healthcare is having an impact then it's probably because so many people still don't have health insurance and healthcare costs are still skyrocketing.

Click to expand...

For folks on this site who do not know ( many I am afraid) Zandi has been an unofficial mouthpiece for the administration for years. That being said, not sure there is enough evidence about a spring swoon just yet, the market does not seem to be indicating one.

It is silly to think that healthcare is not already on the minds of CEOs and business owners when the law comes into effect in eight months. Makes sense that people would be looking to find ways to get under the under 50 people bar for small companies and under the 30 hour bar for part-timers. When do you think people will start working on this problem, december 31???

washunut said:

For folks on this site who do not know ( many I am afraid) Zandi has been an unofficial mouthpiece for the administration for years. That being said, not sure there is enough evidence about a spring swoon just yet, the market does not seem to be indicating one.

It is silly to think that health care is not already on the minds of CEOs and business owners when the law comes into effect in eight months. Makes sense that people would be looking to find ways to get under the under 50 people bar for small companies and under the 30 hour bar for part-timers. When do you think people will start working on this problem, december 31???

Click to expand...

Only time will tell if there's a spring swoon. I couldn't find a parking space at the Home Depot the other day. I take that as good sign. But if CEOs want to live in fear then they're probably not that good of businessmen in the first place. But I suspect most are more interested in building their companies than letting them stagnate or suffer losses because they're too cheap to let their employees have health insurance. The uber conservative state that I live in set up an insurance exchange in 2009 mainly because Utah has an unusually large number of small businesses and self employed and a lot of them don't have health insurance for themselves let alone their handful of employees. They seem to want Obamacare probably because they know it's really Romneycare. lol

Moot said:

Gerrymandering aside, 2010 wasn't a national election year and it was at the height of the tea party movement. But now that the tea party has proven themselves too extreme, do you have any charts for 2012?

Click to expand...

I linked the most recent data I have seen. I also linked data that went back quite a bit.

Do you have data from the 2012 election proving otherwise? I don't.