If Republicans do get back into power, what are they going to do?

[American]

You have to be more specific as to why "people" don't take me more seriously? What people? I don't see where people who listen to you have a lot of credibility.

You claim that CRA loans have been profitable for "three plus decades" so please provide proof of that statement? How do you know that CRA loans have been profitable for both the banks and the people who took advantage of those loans? Where is the proof of that?

It's obvious if you look at Freddie and Fannie, that it's been profitable.

 

[Conservative]

It's obvious if you look at Freddie and Fannie, that it's been profitable.

Maybe OC is confused and believes red ink is good.

 

[obvious Child]

You have to be more specific as to why "people" don't take me more seriously? What people?

Everyone with basic grasp of the English Language and Statistics Mr. "I don't care about linear regression."

In the realm of the educated, talking about the Republicans and Clinton in the same sentence as being at fault for the crisis SHOULD instantly suggest the GSA. The fact you had to ask shows your ignorance of the subject.

I don't see where people who listen to you have a lot of credibility.

Well, what can I expect from someone who thinks Linear Regression isn't important despite being the only way to prove his claims? I'm never going to stop hammering you on that.

You claim that CRA loans have been profitable for "three plus decades" so please provide proof of that statement?

This is probably the fourth time if not the fifth I've posted this:

The Performance and Profitability of CRA-Related Lending
Federal Reserve Report on "The Performance and Profitability of CRA-Related Lending"

Both of which are a decade old. CRA loans have been profitable from the start. If the CRA was the real cause, we should have seen this crisis in the 70s. Not thirty years later.

Furthermore, CRA loans make up an infinitesimally small portion of the overall economy. You are explicitly arguing that less then half of a percent of the economy nearly brought down the entire economy.

And that's one reason I laugh at you.

How do you know that CRA loans have been profitable for both the banks and the people who took advantage of those loans? Where is the proof of that?

It would help if you bothered to read peoples' posts. I'm not the first person to cite how CRA loans have been profitable for decades. You just have a bad tendency to ignore what people write.

 

[obvious Child]

Maybe OC is confused and believes red ink is good.

Well you show you did. After all, you argued that a $10 billion texas deficit as cited by your own Republican Comptroller was actually a surplus. Red ink is Good! Too bad that at least a dozen posters all pointed out how $10 billion in the hole is not a surplus.

 

[Cyberhwk]

Doesn't school start soon and isn't this past your bedtime? The only person I really want to take from is you. There is absolutely no logic or fact in your posts so you just ramble on spouting liberal talking points. You cannot even post who you really are, a liberal. Total dishonesty is all I see from you.

Typical republican rhetotic.

That's not Republican rhetoric. Rhetoric implies CONTENT. That's just ignorance.

I'm surprised someone is allowed to spout of the stuff he does on a message board that's supposedly for "debate."

 

[pbrauer]

That's not Republican rhetoric. Rhetoric implies CONTENT. That's just ignorance.

I'm surprised someone is allowed to spout of the stuff he does on a message board that's supposedly for "debate."

 

[Vader]

That's not Republican rhetoric. Rhetoric implies CONTENT. That's just ignorance.

I'm surprised someone is allowed to spout of the stuff he does on a message board that's supposedly for "debate."

Yeah ... you have a point there.

 

[samsmart]

If we get a bunch of neoconservatives then nothing will change. We already seen the dens changed not a thing.

If we get real Conservatives things will really turn around.

Ron Paul as president would be a great start.

I think Ron Paul as president would be too disruptive to the system, as he would attempt to do all the things he campaigns on through executive order rather than through legislation of Congress.

I'd rather Gary Johnson be president - he would ease the U.S. into libertarian ideology through his policies rather than shove us into them. He would also be better able to work with other politicians as well.

 

[Conservative]

Everyone with basic grasp of the English Language and Statistics Mr. "I don't care about linear regression."

In the realm of the educated, talking about the Republicans and Clinton in the same sentence as being at fault for the crisis SHOULD instantly suggest the GSA. The fact you had to ask shows your ignorance of the subject.



Well, what can I expect from someone who thinks Linear Regression isn't important despite being the only way to prove his claims? I'm never going to stop hammering you on that.



This is probably the fourth time if not the fifth I've posted this:

The Performance and Profitability of CRA-Related Lending
Federal Reserve Report on "The Performance and Profitability of CRA-Related Lending"

Both of which are a decade old. CRA loans have been profitable from the start. If the CRA was the real cause, we should have seen this crisis in the 70s. Not thirty years later.

Furthermore, CRA loans make up an infinitesimally small portion of the overall economy. You are explicitly arguing that less then half of a percent of the economy nearly brought down the entire economy.

And that's one reason I laugh at you.



It would help if you bothered to read peoples' posts. I'm not the first person to cite how CRA loans have been profitable for decades. You just have a bad tendency to ignore what people write.

You know, OC, you are a legend in your own mind and someone who thinks much, much more of themself than those that really know them. How do you know that Freddie and Fannie have been profitable for decades? How many profitable businesses do you know that needed taxpayer bailouts?

By the way your intellectual superior intelligence is a figment of your own imagination.

 

[UtahBill]

I think Ron Paul as president would be too disruptive to the system, as he would attempt to do all the things he campaigns on through executive order rather than through legislation of Congress.

I'd rather Gary Johnson be president - he would ease the U.S. into libertarian ideology through his policies rather than shove us into them. He would also be better able to work with other politicians as well.

I suspect the person who can appeal to a majority of us, and actually be what he seems to be, hasn't been born yet....

 

[obvious Child]

You know, OC, you are a legend in your own mind

Translation: Oh ****. I don't have an argument. Therefore I'm going to criticize him in the hopes that it subsitutes for my total lack of actual relevant reply.

and someone who thinks much, much more of themself than those that really know them. How do you know that Freddie and Fannie have been profitable for decades?

Freddie Mac (FHLMC)(FRE) Annual Report (10K) Quarterly Report (10Q)
Buckmaster Annual Stockholder Reports - Company Detail: Freddie Mac

Way to fail there Conservative.

You do know what a 10k is no? I bet not.

Good luck proving that my argument is wrong. Not that you ever can. To anyone.

How many profitable businesses do you know that needed taxpayer bailouts?

Most actually. Considering the subsidization of the American market by the government from agriculture to energy, it's rampant.

By the way your intellectual superior intelligence is a figment of your own imagination.

Yeah...cuz I base my arguments on facts. Like $10 billion budgetary deficit is not a surplus.

Can less than 1/2 a percent of the economy cause the entire economy to virtually collapse? Well, Conservative thinks so.

 

[Conservative]

Translation: Oh ****. I don't have an argument. Therefore I'm going to criticize him in the hopes that it subsitutes for my total lack of actual relevant reply.



Freddie Mac (FHLMC)(FRE) Annual Report (10K) Quarterly Report (10Q)
Buckmaster Annual Stockholder Reports - Company Detail: Freddie Mac

Way to fail there Conservative.

You do know what a 10k is no? I bet not.

Good luck proving that my argument is wrong. Not that you ever can. To anyone.



Most actually. Considering the subsidization of the American market by the government from agriculture to energy, it's rampant.



Yeah...cuz I base my arguments on facts. Like $10 billion budgetary deficit is not a surplus.

You truly are a legend in your own mind, why did we have to bail out Freddie and Fannie with such healthy financials? No idea what a 10K is, LOL but I do know that you are quite the arrogant one. Seems that the most arrogant are the book smart street stupid ones. Think I have you figured out, an individual failure in life who has to be a bully in a debate group.

 

[randel]

You truly are a legend in your own mind, why did we have to bail out Freddie and Fannie with such healthy financials? No idea what a 10K is, LOL but I do know that you are quite the arrogant one. Seems that the most arrogant are the book smart street stupid ones. Think I have you figured out, an individual failure in life who has to be a bully in a debate group.

why not just debate and cut the personal attacks?

 

[Conservative]

why not just debate and cut the personal attacks?

Why don't you put on a skirt, get some pom poms and go cheer for your local high school team.

 

[obvious Child]

You truly are a legend in your own mind

And all of the people who keep thanking my posts showing just how weak of a poster you are.

You asked me to show how CRA loans are profitable. I did. For the fourth time. And you change your argument and ask for showing Freddie and Fannie being profitable...which I then linked you to over a decade of 10ks showing both with solid profitability.

Rather then be a man and admit you are wrong (that's never going to happen with someone as immature as you are) you attempt to throw out insults in hopes that somehow makes up for your complete lack of rebuttal.

why did we have to bail out Freddie and Fannie with such healthy financials?

Wow. Talk about sheer massive dishonesty. You asked this "How do you know that Freddie and Fannie have been profitable for decades?" Which I met. Seriously, do you think we would not notice your constant changing of arguments every time someone meets your challenge?

You run away from every challenge you make making new ones hoping no one realizes you were a coward from the last one you made. But we're not that stupid. We see you make challenges, get smacked down and then run to the next one without even stopping to ever acknowledge you were slapped around.

No idea what a 10K is

Not surprising.

LOL but I do know that you are quite the arrogant one.

Yeah, but that doesn't make me wrong. Arrogance is independent of being right or wrong. You are ridiculous arrogant...and ridiculously wrong all of the time. I'm arrogant and often correct. So much here that you can't even respond to what I linked without personal attacks.

Seems that the most arrogant are the book smart street stupid ones. Think I have you figured out, an individual failure in life who has to be a bully in a debate group.

Apparently studies from decades of CRA is not reality or street smarts.

Seriously man up and admit you are wrong. Your user name is very incorrect considering how little you subscribe to personal responsibility.

 

[randel]

Why don't you put on a skirt, get some pom poms and go cheer for your local high school team.

did i hit a sore spot with you?? again, why not cut the personal attacks and actually debate? you will eventually get tired of having your ass handed to you day after day.

 

[Conservative]

did i hit a sore spot with you?? again, why not cut the personal attacks and actually debate? you will eventually get tired of having your ass handed to you day after day.

Why is it you ignore the content of the posts. I have posted actual data, sites for that data yet you ignore the data. All I see from you is one line answers and thank yous for others who never respond to the actual posts but do a great job diverting from the post. My mistake is allowing it to happen.

 

[obvious Child]

did i hit a sore spot with you?? again, why not cut the personal attacks and actually debate? you will eventually get tired of having your ass handed to you day after day.

Because debate requires both sides to address the other's arguments. Do we ever see ever Conservative doing that? No. Therefore conservative cannot debate.

 

[obvious Child]

Why is it you ignore the content of the posts. I have posted actual data, sites for that data yet you ignore the data.

Wow. Talk about dishonest. You still don't get that posting raw aggregate data doesn't prove that specific policies are at fault.

Well, you did say that you don't care about Linear Regression. What on EARTH makes you think you can credibly argue on the basis of raw data when you have adamantly made it clear you hate statistics?

 

[randel]

Because debate requires both sides to address the other's arguments. Do we ever see ever Conservative doing that? No. Therefore conservative cannot debate.

agreed....sad but true

 

[Conservative]

And all of the people who keep thanking my posts showing just how weak of a poster you are.

LOL, you have a great lineup of "friends"

You asked me to show how CRA loans are profitable. I did. For the fourth time. And you change your argument and ask for showing Freddie and Fannie being profitable...which I then linked you to over a decade of 10ks showing both with solid profitability.

Then why did we have to bail out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae?

Rather then be a man and admit you are wrong (that's never going to happen with someone as immature as you are) you attempt to throw out insults in hopes that somehow makes up for your complete lack of rebuttal.

What does any of this have to do with the thread topic. You do a great job diverting from the thread topic and I do apologize for responding and allowing tha to happen.

Wow. Talk about sheer massive dishonesty. You asked this "How do you know that Freddie and Fannie have been profitable for decades?" Which I met. Seriously, do you think we would not notice your constant changing of arguments every time someone meets your challenge?

Such successful programs that are pumped up by taxpayer dollars, so much they they cannot stand on their own and aren't even part of the financial reform. You must be so proud.

You run away from every challenge you make making new ones hoping no one realizes you were a coward from the last one you made. But we're not that stupid. We see you make challenges, get smacked down and then run to the next one without even stopping to ever acknowledge you were slapped around.

I have dealt with a lot of people in my life all worth a heck of a lot more than you. When you say you aren't that stupid, I disagree. Now how does the personal attacks address the thread topic?

Not surprising.

Nothing surprises me about you

Yeah, but that doesn't make me wrong. Arrogance is independent of being right or wrong. You are ridiculous arrogant...and ridiculously wrong all of the time. I'm arrogant and often correct. So much here that you can't even respond to what I linked without personal attacks.

Nor does it make you right or providing responses to the thread topic.

 

[Conservative]

Wow. Talk about dishonest. You still don't get that posting raw aggregate data doesn't prove that specific policies are at fault.

Well, you did say that you don't care about Linear Regression. What on EARTH makes you think you can credibly argue on the basis of raw data when you have adamantly made it clear you hate statistics?

I am done with you as I just received a warning infraction. Either you or one of your so called "friends" reported me for baiting when that is all you and those so called friends do. I am man enough to take what you and others here have to offer, apparently you aren't.

 

[obvious Child]

LOL, you have a great lineup of "friends"

Yeah. We know the difference between a surplus and a deficit. You have demonstrated otherwise. Several times.

Then why did we have to bail out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae?

How about you first admit that CRA loans were profitable and that Mac and Mae were profitable for years? Or you can keep being a dishonest hack who has no interest in honest debate.

What does any of this have to do with the thread topic.

Not much. But as the last two pages have shown, you are clearly unwilling to admit you are wrong. Even when faced with hard evidence. So I'm going to hammer you since you refuse to admit that you are wrong. Kids gloves are coming off.

Such successful programs that are pumped up by taxpayer dollars, so much they they cannot stand on their own and aren't even part of the financial reform. You must be so proud.

Wow. Look. You can't reply with a relevant comment to a post you quoted. See my post to Randel.

I have dealt with a lot of people in my life all worth a heck of a lot more than you. When you say you aren't that stupid, I disagree. Now how does the personal attacks address the thread topic?

It deals with your complete inability to act like an adult. Which is required for debate.

Nothing surprises me about you

Well, when you have no use for facts...nothing can surprise you.

Nor does it make you right or providing responses to the thread topic.

Except I already replied to the OP.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...nto-power-they-going-do-3.html#post1058864624

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...nto-power-they-going-do-4.html#post1058864679

Good job on failing to read the thread.

 

[Conservative]

OC, I want to thank you or one of your "friends" for the following:

Dear Conservative,

You have received an infraction at Debate Politics Forums.

Reason: Baiting / Flaming / Trolling


I will no longer be responding to any of your posts or anyone of those so called friends that have given you a thank you. Your personal attacks on me never were reported as I am mature enough to not do something like that to anyone here. I don't believe in it. If you aren't mature enough to take the heat you have no business here. It is obvious to me that you have very thin skin and I have no use for that. Bye!

 

[FilmFestGuy]

In my line of work I can see how this happens, I see businesses leaving a closing at a alarming rate. I have gotten to know a lot of small business up close and personal including the one I work for. The biggest complaint is regulations and taxes and in that order, if not for these issues the employer would be able to pay out more on labor and stay in business and remain some what profitable. Anyway big corporations is not what I am referring to but that said, big corporation will always make money, either here in the U.S. or otherwise. Now look at NJ, MI., CA. and see what is happening, if they can't afford to operate these companies pack up and leave or just shut down, but we got even with them attitude has put those on the unemployment line. Big business and small employ people... it's that simple, punish the employer and it will in turn punish the employee through shut downs, layoffs and pay reduction. The government isn't going to help one live at the level that the employer was able to provide for the employee.

Okay. I accept their complaints: But what regulations specifically? What taxes specifically?

Here's my biggest complaint. My parents were in business, and aside from the health inspector checking out my mom's catering business at least once a year, neither said much about regulation at all.

So, what regulations upset them? I'd like to know. (Taxes, I understand, but since I'm in not-for-profit, we only worry about payroll taxes).