• 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 to Dems: Kill the bill

Tettsuo

Compassion is Strength
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
3,750
Reaction score
2,758
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Elizabeth Warren to Dems: Kill the bill - Seung Min Kim - POLITICO

“Now, the House of Representatives is about to show us the worst of government for the rich and powerful,” she continued. “The House is about to vote on a budget deal, a deal negotiated behind closed doors that slips in a provision that would let derivatives traders on Wall Street gamble with taxpayer money and get bailed out by the government when their risky bets threaten to blow up our financial system.”She acknowledged that bipartisan House and Senate negotiators have worked “long and hard” on the spending bill, and that Senate leadership “deserve great credit for preventing the House from carrying out some of their more aggressive … fantasies about dismantling even more pieces of financial reform.”


I expect both left and right to fight against this type of economic nonsense that allows the worst players to raid the American taxpayers.
 
wall street, in backroom negotiations, tells our lawmakers to again allow the taxpayers to underwrite the gamble with derivatives
a resumption of privatizing the potentially massive profits and socializing the massive potential losses
this illustrates why Elizabeth Warren (and Bernie Sanders) should be the on democratic ticket in 2016
otherwise we will continue to have the best government money can buy
 
wall street, in backroom negotiations, tells our lawmakers to again allow the taxpayers to underwrite the gamble with derivatives
a resumption of privatizing the potentially massive profits and socializing the massive potential losses
this illustrates why Elizabeth Warren (and Bernie Sanders) should be the on democratic ticket in 2016
otherwise we will continue to have the best government money can buy
Someone had a suggestion last week, that maybe politicians should have to ware body cameras,
with the content available for public viewing.
If it is good for the cops, why not the politicians?
 
wall street, in backroom negotiations, tells our lawmakers to again allow the taxpayers to underwrite the gamble with derivatives
a resumption of privatizing the potentially massive profits and socializing the massive potential losses
this illustrates why Elizabeth Warren (and Bernie Sanders) should be the on democratic ticket in 2016
otherwise we will continue to have the best government money can buy

Unless those measures are needed to pass PPACA, then guaranteed profit and socialized losses become acceptable. ;)
 
wall street, in backroom negotiations, tells our lawmakers to again allow the taxpayers to underwrite the gamble with derivatives
a resumption of privatizing the potentially massive profits and socializing the massive potential losses
this illustrates why Elizabeth Warren (and Bernie Sanders) should be the on democratic ticket in 2016
otherwise we will continue to have the best government money can buy
Oh please get them on the ticket...I can't think of a better Christmas present.
 
Someone had a suggestion last week, that maybe politicians should have to ware body cameras,
with the content available for public viewing.
If it is good for the cops, why not the politicians?

That was me.
 
Why should I believe what Warren says? Half truths and lies are common.
 
if dems kill the bill more so in the senate then the government shuts down.
they can't blame republicans.

I am eh on the sections in question.

dodd/frank has not done what it was suppose to do and has probably created more issues than what it solved.
that is what happens when you issue 400 new regulations.

I honestly think banking / investment banking should be kept separated.
neither the twain should met and taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for bad businesses investments.

also the bill isn't getting rid of all regulations on default swaps but expanding the ones that can be used.

a large part of the lack of recovery was that lending and business investment was stifled under this administration.
without the outflow of capital companies had a hard time expanding and generating revenue.

What’s in the spending bill? We skim it so you don’t have to - The Washington Post

here is a list of all the things in the budget.

I really like the one that puts a clamp on the EPA clean water act over-reach.
 
Last edited:
She's a native American...lol

Right, haha, the Indian thing. Lulz.

You guys have nothing substantive against her.
 
wall street, in backroom negotiations, tells our lawmakers to again allow the taxpayers to underwrite the gamble with derivatives
a resumption of privatizing the potentially massive profits and socializing the massive potential losses
this illustrates why Elizabeth Warren (and Bernie Sanders) should be the on democratic ticket in 2016
otherwise we will continue to have the best government money can buy

We have the best government money can buy today. Why would that change? Do you really think Warren or Sanders would pass up tens of millions of dollars from Wall Street Firms to finance their campaign for president? There would be a wink and an nod agreement that either on could continue their feisty rhetoric against Wall Street while doing nothing but helping those who do the financing. That is exactly what we have today.

I am sure neither wants to see a 100 million in contributions, all go to their opponent if it is deemed they meant what they say. As the old saying goes, just watch the money. Those on Wall Street are very smart, not dummies and they will not make an investment in any political campaign unless they view that investment will provide a sound return.
 
"I'm an indian", "The subprime morthages targetted black folks". There's two.

No, that's one, because the "Indian" idiocy is just conservative whackadoodle hackery, right up there with screaming "Benghazi!" or "You didn't build that!" with zero understanding of what the discussion is about, so the "Indian thing" is dismissed. It's a particularly low hanging fruit for partisan right wing retards.

As for the subprime mortage targeting minorities, how was that a lie?
 
No, that's one, because the "Indian" idiocy is just conservative whackadoodle hackery, right up there with screaming "Benghazi!" or "You didn't build that!" with zero understanding of what the discussion is about, so the "Indian thing" is dismissed. It's a particularly low hanging fruit for partisan right wing retards.

As for the subprime mortage targeting minorities, how was that a lie?

Are you serious? How do you expect to be taken seriously? :lamo
 
Someone had a suggestion last week, that maybe politicians should have to ware body cameras,
with the content available for public viewing.
If it is good for the cops, why not the politicians?

why not all citizens, if you suspect someone of a crime you can just check their body cam to see if they did it
 
Are you serious? How do you expect to be taken seriously? :lamo

Well, tell us about the quote and how it's a lie. Before I discuss this further with you I want to know if you have an understanding of the topic or if you're just lobbing out bumper sticker phrases like "You didn't build that!" or "What difference does it make!"

And anybody who brings up the Native American thing has already ceded the right to be taken seriously.
 
if dems kill the bill more so in the senate then the government shuts down.
they can't blame republicans.

I am eh on the sections in question.

dodd/frank has not done what it was suppose to do and has probably created more issues than what it solved.
that is what happens when you issue 400 new regulations.

Another failed excessively, and needless complex piece of exponentially government growing POS legislation.

I honestly think banking / investment banking should be kept separated.
neither the twain should met and taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for bad businesses investments.

Exactly. All that'd have to be done would be to bring back the Glass-Steagall act with a bit of freshening up.

also the bill isn't getting rid of all regulations on default swaps but expanding the ones that can be used.

a large part of the lack of recovery was that lending and business investment was stifled under this administration.
without the outflow of capital companies had a hard time expanding and generating revenue.

What’s in the spending bill? We skim it so you don’t have to - The Washington Post

here is a list of all the things in the budget.

I really like the one that puts a clamp on the EPA clean water act over-reach.

Yup. That too is stifling the economy and the recovery, and will continue to do so until they are repealed / lifted, and we've got all this government debt and ObamaCare bills that we have to pay for. Not time to be stifling the economy. It needs to be on turbo chargers.
 
I haven't seen any proof the bill says all that yet.

Uh huh. You don't know what's in the bill yet so she's lying.

Right.
 
Uh huh. You don't know what's in the bill yet so she's lying.

Right.

I said half truths and lies are common. I assume you read the bill and can quote it.
 
I said half truths and lies are common. I assume you read the bill and can quote it.

Which is why I wanted examples, because if you're going to assume lies and half truths were said then I want a history of her behavior that would suggest she's not to be trusted.
 
why not all citizens, if you suspect someone of a crime you can just check their body cam to see if they did it
No, it is just Politicians, I think need to be held to a higher standard.
 
Which is why I wanted examples, because if you're going to assume lies and half truths were said then I want a history of her behavior that would suggest she's not to be trusted.

I posted the bill and the contents of the bill from the Washington post on page two.
It doesn't say what she says it says.

There is simply an expansion of some of the derivatives that can be used. it does not totally get rid of dodd frank all together.
and these are derivatives that all banks have wanted to allow back in to begin with.
 
Back
Top Bottom