• 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

NIMBY said:
You're purposely ignoring that this is about the swaps-pushout rule, which is now gone.

How Wall St. got its way - Dave Clarke and Kate Davidson and Jon Prior - POLITICO
Click to expand...

I didn't ignore it. I JUST explained it to you. This is about Section 716 Dodd-Frank, also known as Prohibition Against Government Bailouts of Swap Entities, or the 'Swap-Pushout Rule' as you referred it to. And I also went into great detail explaining some of the finer aspects of the provision here (not that it is very complex or long).

So here you tell me I was played by Sen. Warren and it isn't difficult to understand why.
As you directly insult me by calling me a low-information voter.

Is this your normal way of posting ??
Click to expand...

It's only an insult if you find it insulting, but most people generally don't know this. And somehow you didn't understand that the provision being repealed with this spending bill was Section 716 of Dodd Frank, so I'll leave you to decide how informed you are.

But yes, people fooled by this fiasco are generally low information voters, and its probably not their fault. Most people don't pay attention to finance, regulation, or financial regulation. It's not uncommon for politicians to bank on the ignorance of the voter, as we've learned from Gruber... Whether or not the bill passes or fails, Warren can vote against funding the government while claiming that she is once again the champion of the average American, while this meaningless provision would have of Dodd Frank would have done absolutely nothing to prevent future crisis, or bailouts. Most of all, no one will never remember how meaningless this provision is years from now. But that is politics for you.
 
fred68 said:
Eric? Anyway, stock market shows confidence in economy. If Obama were as bad as some say, it wouldn't be this high. Anyway, what have republicans done to improve the economy? It seem that their main focus has been on obstructing Obama, who's really not as bad as they say, in my opinion.
Click to expand...


Lol .....

Not this Stock market.

I advise you to educate yourself a little more about the Feds Quantitative easing and its influence on the Equities markets.

The FED drives down yields on Bonds to the point where it pushes investors out of safe fixed yields investments and into the Equities and Commodities markets.

The Stock market has never been more disconnected from the economy than it is now.
 
Anthony60 said:
Other than she is a socialist. How about the "you didn't build that" mentality?
Click to expand...

Obama was 100% correct when he said that, just FYI. He was talking about the infrastructure that allows businesses to thrive.
 
Amadeus said:
Obama was 100% correct when he said that, just FYI. He was talking about the infrastructure that allows businesses to thrive.
Click to expand...

He was justifying taking more and more for the private sector.
 
Amadeus said:
Obama was 100% correct when he said that, just FYI. He was talking about the infrastructure that allows businesses to thrive.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's probably one of the ridiculous things that Obama and Warren has ever said. They assume that the income for investment roads and bridges is derived from the income taken from the public businesses don't contribute to that. This is false.

People tend to say dumb things to rally to the extreme base. Even Hillary Clinton has done this recently.
 
TurtleDude said:
He was justifying taking more and more for the private sector.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect.

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me—because they want to give something back. They know they didn't—look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own... If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen
Click to expand...
 
Amadeus said:
That is incorrect.
Click to expand...

Obama is a pimp and a parasite. He was justifying taking more. You didn't quote the entire bit of bs from that turd
 
Jack Hays said:
Ah. The beauty of bipartisanship. Boehner and BHO in alliance.
Click to expand...

Heya JH. :2wave: You got that Right.


John Boehner, Master of Winning Ugly.....

No politician has mastered the art of winning ugly quite as well as House Speaker John Boehner.

That’s because Boehner has been a first-rate speaker. This is a good part of the reason he will keep his job in the next Congress. Republicans -- including the radicals, I suspect -- know that by following their personal incentives, they’re constantly setting him up to look terrible. That he finds ways for them to do so while avoiding disasters is a quality they probably appreciate very much.....snip~

John Boehner Keeps Spending Bill Alive With an Ugly Win - Bloomberg View
 
TurtleDude said:
Obama is a pimp and a parasite. He was justifying taking more. You didn't quote the entire bit of bs from that turd
Click to expand...

I quoted everything relevant to the "you didn't build that" comment that the right-wing flips out about.
 
Amadeus said:
I quoted everything relevant to the "you didn't build that" comment that the right-wing flips out about.
Click to expand...

so what was the ultimate point to the pimp's rant?
 
NIMBY said:
Of course you did--
Click to expand...

No, I didn't. I explained it to you many times. I don't know of any easier ways to explain it.

yer all in for the TBTF Wall Street banks.
And against the little banks on Main Street who benefit from the Export-Import Bank .
Click to expand...

If you don't want banks to become too big to fail, then don't subsidise them (FDIC) and don't bail them out. Nothing on the books regarding financial regulation is insuring that a systemic crisis won't happen again.
 
Anthony60 said:
Other than she is a socialist. How about the "you didn't build that" mentality?
Click to expand...

she was absolutely correct in recognizing that commerce does not happen in an environment free of government participation
share with us what kind of work you are engaged in and i will reply with an array of instances in which the government's actions facilitate your commercial activities, to illustrate that enterprise does not go it alone - without government involvement - when conducting business
 
TurtleDude said:
so what was the ultimate point to the pimp's rant?
Click to expand...

Let me quote even more:

On a campaign swing through Virginia, Obama stopped in Roanoke to speak to supporters.[14] In his remarks Obama noted that while he was willing to cut government waste, he would not gut investments that grow the economy or give tax breaks to millionaires like himself or Mitt Romney.[9] Obama went on to say that rich people did not get rich solely due to their own talent and hard work, but that, to varying degrees, they owe some of their success to good fortune and the contributions of government.[15] Obama said in this context:

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me – because they want to give something back. They know they didn't – look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something – there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.[16]

Obama then cited the funding of the G.I. Bill, the creation of the middle class, the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge and Hoover Dam, creation of the Internet, and landing on the moon as examples of what he was talking about.[9]
Click to expand...
 
so tell me what was his ultimate point Amadeus?

from WIKI

the president's remark was made in the context of his belief that wealthy citizens should pay higher taxes to serve the public good:[4]
 
fred68 said:
The economy got stifled before Obama even entered the white house. Things are looking better now, jobs, stock market etc. Careful what you wish for, like republicans in charge.
Click to expand...

Yes, the financial collapse was well underway when Obama took office.

Yes, stock market is looking better, and has looked good for many of the last years, but in my estimation this is due to the financial crack the Fed's been injecting into the economy to keep the patient, the economy, alive. I wonder about the withdraw symptoms that may yet come.

Finally! After more than 6 years, the jobs are coming back. Too bad the majority of them are part time rather than full time, or so it is my understanding, not full time jobs which families need to meet their financial obligations, to put food on the table, to send kids to college, and full time jobs which qualify for the much lauded, but far more hated ObamaCare, so limited opportunities for healthcare coverage.

Compliance to regulations costs a business money. If Obama and his administration hadn't piled on even more useless regulation, further concerning businesses and business owners, it would be common sense that the recovery would have been far more vigorous far earlier, with far less need for the Fed's crack injection.

In less than a month, the Republicans will have control over 2/3's of the federal government as well as a large majority of the state leadership positions. Let's see if they can do any better than what we've suffered under for the last 6 years. We can only be hopeful that they can and that they will. Certainly doesn't look like the Democrats can, based on the recent performance.
 
NIMBY said:
TEAparty Republicans and Liberal Democrats hate the campaign finance changes and Wall Street giveaways at the last moment.
Strange bedfellows indeed.

On the DEM side, Warren and Pelosi versus Hoyer, Reid and Obama .
Click to expand...

I have to admit that I'm far from thrilled about the campaign finance changes and Wall Street giveaways. To me that seems like a major step backwards from where we should be going.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
You know what bothers me about that, is that so much attention is paid to the so called "far right tea partiers" that serve to obstruct congress, but no attention is ever paid to Elizabeth Warren. I wonder why that is...
Click to expand...

If you actually pay attention, the answer to your question will become quite obvious.....
 
justabubba said:
she was absolutely correct in recognizing that commerce does not happen in an environment free of government participation
Click to expand...
Commerce can most definitely happen without government participation. It's unclear why anyone could possibly believe that it couldn't, and hasn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom