BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 12:00 AM

Yes, I'm sure there are no lobbyists lobbying against Obama's pet bills. None at all. None, like, say, big insurance companies who stand to lose bazillions if we add a public option. Not at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:40 PM

Obama: No lobbying allowed except for my buds and my contributors and...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:22 AM

Big business doesn't like proposed financial reform. Legislators seeking reelection funds are amenable to pressure from big business. News at 11.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:13 AM

Obama supporter, Warren Buffett Lobbying Senate Committee to Avoid Derivatives Reform

Warren Buffett is lobbying the U.S. Senate to avoid derivatives reforms that would require, among other things, financial institutions to put up collateral to cover potential losses.

According to the WSJ, Buffett, who has referred to derivatives as financial weapons of mass destruction, is leaning on Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson to help him with an exemption that would potentially help Berkshire Hathaway's (BRKa) (BRKb) $63 billion derivatives portfolio avoid a financial hit.

The provision, sought by [Buffett] and pushed by Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson in the Senate Agriculture Committee, would largely exempt existing derivatives contracts from the proposed rules the Journal said. Previously, the legislation could have allowed regulators to require that companies such as Nebraska-based Berkshire, the investment group led by Mr. Buffett, put aside large sums to cover potential losses.

The Journal also noted that that the White House wants to kill the language in the provision pushed by Buffett on the grounds that it would weaken the govt's ability to regulate the $450 trillion derivatives market which allows investors to speculate on the future price of a good, such as oil or mortgages, without buying the underlying investment.

The new legislation could require that derivatives trade more like stocks or bonds on exchanges, instead of in private deals, the paper said.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 03:49 AM

Mouser: "Requiring a stimulus package which, if we had the debt situation left by Clinton, the Democrat, would hardly have been felt. Thankfully it has stabilized the economy and we appear to be on the road to recovery. What the Democrats do best."

Refer to:

       Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 03:45 AM

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 03:33 AM

Hmm.... compare tax rates under Obama to tax rates under Eisenhower. Which is the Dem and which is the Republican? Tax rates are so far from obscene right now it's absurd to even put the words on the same page. Obscenely low on the greedy bastards at the top, maybe, who sell all our jobs to the Chinese and milk the government for corporate welfare to line their greasy pockets. They could stand to pay some more in taxes. But you love them, no doubt.

And don't talk to me about running governments into bankruptcy. Clinton had a balanced budget. Bush unbalanced it with two unnecessary wars. Then Repuglican policies lead to the "near" collapse and the TARP, pushed and signed by a Repuglican, drove us further in. Requiring a stimulus package which, if we had the debt situation left by Clinton, the Democrat, would hardly have been felt. Thankfully it has stabilized the economy and we appear to be on the road to recovery. What the Democrats do best. It's the economy, stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 02:47 AM

Mouser: "Blocking work is what the Republican caucus of this Senate does best."

...And running state and federal governments into bankruptcy, and raising taxes to obscene levels is what the Democraps do best....Just ask California, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and now the U.S.!

That crap, SHOULD be blocked!!

Wink, GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:39 AM

Blocking work is what the Republican caucus of this Senate does best.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 02:04 PM

Sawzaw-
It's not so much that the Repubs don't like aspects of the proposed bill--they were filibustering to keep it from even discussed on the Senate floor.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 11:07 AM

Sawzaw, Dodd, McCain, Frank, Rangle, Waters, Pelosi, Reid, Specter, Gingrich, among others, both sides of the aisle, are crooks, and should be dealt with accordingly!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 02:00 AM

I have heard Repubs say there are things in the bill they like and some they don't like. They said they especially liked the stuff abot derivaties.

It is being spun as the Repubs are against reform.

They believe the bill does nothing to prevent big banks from getting bailouts.

McCain and a Democrat Maria Cantwell proposed reinstating Glass Steagall back in December.

That would require a lot less work than a new bill because it is already written and everybody knows what is in it and how it will work. A no brainer.

Other new stuff could be hashed out and enacted later.

The Party of YES? said NO, that would be like going back to the walkman.

Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Chairman, Chris Dodd, bought and paid for by Wall Street, says he has something better.

Contributions to Dodd:

SAC Capital Partners...........$248,200
Citigroup Inc..................$155,594
Royal Bank of Scotland.........$142,600
United Technologies............$141,500
Bear Stearns...................$118,550
Goldman Sachs..................$105,400
Travelers Companies.............$98,900
American International Group....$98,100
The Hartford....................$92,250
JPMorgan Chase & Co.............$72,250
Ernst & Young...................$70,750
Merrill Lynch...................$68,300
Morgan Stanley..................$67,100
General Electric................$60,850
KPMG LLP........................$59,900
PricewaterhouseCoopers..........$59,800
Apollo Advisors.................$57,900
Bank of America.................$57,850
UBS AG..........................$54,200
Liberty Mutual Insurance........$52,800

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 12:33 AM

I think they realized they were starting to look like they were in the pocket of big finance. Of course they are, as are the democrats, but at least the democrats were proposing legislation. But the public is still angry about the near-collapse of the Fall of 2008. So many are jobless, or know or are related to somebody who is unemployed. This happened on Bush's watch, caused by policies initiated under Reagan (and Clinton but nobody remembers that), and the Republicans were refusing to help write legislation to prevent its happening again. Otnay Ootay Ightbray.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 11:14 PM

God is now eating pop corn with m&m's in it while laughing at the Christians utter blaphemies and athiests quote Christ. (He/she loves these kind of plot twists)


but I digress

Its a good thing that the Kentucky Derby is this weekend or the Republicans might have stayed late to veto debate on Wall St. reform for a fourth time. Or maybe it was the 3 strikes and you're out rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 10:54 PM

God's the audience.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 10:57 AM

Foolestroupe: "If you cut through the one question, then the ten thousand questions disappear."

If all the world is a stage......where does the audience sit?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 02:52 AM

Here is your Zen of the Day:
The ten thousand questions are one question. If you cut through the one question, then the ten thousand questions disappear.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 02:37 AM

This should be relevant to this thread, being as it is where you're at.

Subject: RE: BS: Democratic Party Terrorist Organization?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:00 PM



After you may have read that, (its short), both the Repubicraps and the Democraps, all say basically the same thing....they BOTH ARE INSISTING THEY KNOW WHATS 'BEST FOR US'.....guess what??...They're both full of shit! They are not only both puppets, they are working in tandem, by the puppet masters!


Betcha' don't quite see it.

Yo-Ho, Little Hawk, here's a shot for ya'......you explain it! Grinning!

GfS


P.S. I'll be watching............

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Apr 10 - 02:24 AM

Hey, Thanks Poppagator!! I'm so used to the wannabe intellectuals on here bitching at me, for every little thing, they can't even see that I'm on their side and ROOTING..<<<(for the Ebber), for them. Yes, if you play with horns, B flat is where they like! Just for shits and giggles, you can get around that by playing with them in G blues(pentatonic scale)...and still be in key!...because G blues scale is in Bflat major! Mix them together! Next time you're with the guys!

Smiling,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:54 PM

Any bank that's "too big to fail" should be busted up into independent smaller banks that are not "too big to fail".

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: PoppaGator
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 03:54 PM

"Actually, I can't think of anything I do that is in B??? B7th??? Yeah, but just one... Guess that there ain't alot of B in blues... lol... Maybe they should call it "lues"???"

You will if you play with horns!!
(Not suggesting you should be horny, though.......)"

Actually, to play with horns, you'd best be able to play in B-flat, which my music-PhD friend Jimbo calls "the official key of New Orleans" because of the brass-instrument issue

Simplest strategy: capo up one fret and use key-of-A shapes, or go up four frets and play as though in G. A is undoubtedly the better "blues key," but ~ depending upon the song, and upon whether the guitar part should have a blues "flavor" ~ G will sometimes be the better choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 02:14 PM

From a WSJ Blog entry by an AFL-CIO executive:


Wall Street needs to return to the basic principles of regulation
Apr 27, 2010 13:12 EDT

– Damon Silvers is director of policy and special counsel for AFL-CIO. The views expressed are his own. —

The Wall Street Accountability Act is a conservative piece of legislation. It is a return to the basic principles of financial regulation that helped our country and the world avoid major financial crises from the 1930's to the 1980's, principles that our country turned away from in the name of free market fundamentalism and under pressure from the political power of the financial sector itself.

While the legislation is long and detailed, the principles of financial regulation it embodies are simple and straightforward.

1)    Insurance should only be sold to parties that have something to insure, and a company that sells insurance should have to put capital aside to back up their promise (derivatives regulation).
2)    If you are buying and selling stocks and bonds and other investments on behalf of other people, you have to be loyal to your customers and provide them with enough information for them to oversee what you are doing (hedge fund regulation).
3)    A stable banking system requires deposit insurance, and insured institutions must be regulated to limit their leverage and keep them away from highly risky activity (systemic risk regulation and the Volcker rule).
4)    If an insured institution fails, it must be shut down in a way that protects both its depositors and the financial system, but that wipes out the management, stockholders and long term creditors to the extent the insured institution's liabilities exceed its assets (resolution authority).
5)    You can't ask a regulator to at the same time ensure banks are financially healthy and to ensure that consumers are treated fairly (independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency).

Derivatives, hedge funds, private equity firms, off balance sheet vehicles, the repeal of Glass-Steagall—all these so-called financial innovations were and are really nothing more than successful efforts by smart lawyers to undermine these principles, and the Wall Street Accountability Act is nothing more than an effort to restore them.

Of course the Wall Street Accountability Act is an imperfect effort to end the Swiss cheese system of financial regulation. It is, after all, the product of a political process that continues to be far too much under the influence of the financial firms.

The Act needs to be strengthened by covering private equity funds as well as hedge funds, and giving the SEC the power to force disclosures by these funds to their investors. Congress should close loopholes in the derivatives section. Most of all, the Senate should adopt limits on bank size such as those in Senator Sherrod Brown and Ted Kauffman's amendment. We should understand by now that as banks get bigger, it becomes harder for our political system to obey these common sense principles.

The Act is missing the basic idea that if you make a mess you should have to clean it up—which means the financial sector needs to pay the public back for the costs of the financial collapse. Wall Street should be taxed not just for the direct costs of TARP, as President Obama rightly proposes, but for the real costs of addressing the job loss that continues to escalate and the trillion dollar subsidies provided by the Federal Reserve to the financial sector in the form of free credit in response to the crisis.

Finally, though, the Wall Street Accountability Act is conservative in another deeper sense—it is a test of whether our government can respond to the reality of the damage done to our republic by a failed generation long experiment in market radicalism. In the end that raises the question of whether we still have, in the words of another president from Illinois, "government of, by and for the people."

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 01:02 PM

There was plenty of OTHER evidence, aside from the donations stats, that showed Bush up as a puppet of big industry and high finance. Cheny was a walking example of this kind of oligarchic corruption.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:18 AM

Amos, Amos, Amos...

"Now, for you to imply because of that that Obama is in the pocket of some of his contributors, rather than others, is either short-sighted or ddisingenuous"

YOU seemed to make that connection in regards to Bush- ANOTHER example of your bigoted double standard. The mere fact of a contribution to him was enough for you to ignore the trial and go straight to the execution, like the Red Queen.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 10:12 PM

Oh, Rigs???

Like which one???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 10:07 PM

"Well, I'd have ti say that Goldman Sachs made a poor investment when it came to Obama..."


               Actually, they seem to love his proposals. Maybe they placed credit-default-swaps predicated on his program to fail.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 09:45 PM

Bruce:

Of course his campaign was paid for. ALL campaigns are paid for. Including that of your illustrious archetype, W.

That's how campaigns are made possible.

Now, for you to imply because of that that Obama is in the pocket of some of his contributors, rather than others, is either short-sighted or ddisingenuous.

Now come on, Bruiser. You know I love ya!!

But I won't get f**ed without at least a kiss.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 08:37 PM

Oh, wait...

Seems that Mitch McConnell has come up with a new 'n improved lie-de-jour'... This right off the press... The reason that they fillibustered the financial reform bill, which in essence stopped debate on it, was becuase they wanted to debate the bill???

Me thinks it is well past time for manditory drug testing in Congress... And watch Mitch McConnell real close when you take his pee speciment to be sure he ain't got a little jar of clear stuff in his pocket...

I mean, really... This is getting purdy pathetic on the Repubs side... Stopping a debate because they want a debate???? What is wrong here???

Beam me up, Scottie...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 08:19 PM

Just MY opinion, of the same worth as YOURS or AMOS's.

The difference being that theirs have some evidence to back them up.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 07:43 PM

Well, Bruce, my friend...

This is the lie-de-jour' that the Repubs are putting out so if yer not throwing it out as if it's the Gospel then you are in a very slim minority amoung the Repubs...

Unless, of course, Mitch McConnell has spun new mythology today to be parroted... If so, I haven't heard the new 'n improved lie-de-jour' from him...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 06:53 PM

Bobert,

I have to disagree. IMO, your statement is false.

I do not feel that way
I am a Republican

Therefore, your statement is false.


SOME Republicans might feel that way- But then, IMO, SOME Democrats have been acting and voting in a manner which leads me to believe they are "Bought and Paid for."

Obama is one of them.


Just MY opinion, of the same worth as YOURS or AMOS's.

Respectfully,

bb

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 06:40 PM

Well, I'd have ti say that Goldman Sachs made a poor investment when it came to Obama...

But let's get real here... It ain't the progressives here who are stonewalling on reform... It's the other way around... I mean, we have the equivent of the "death sqauds" being thrown out be the conservatives as "bailouts"... This is not a true statement but rather than the Repubs just sayin' "Hey, we're here to protect the fat cats" they lie... They want the people to think that it is they, the conservatives, who are out to protect Joe Sixpack???

What a joke???

But the conservatives have used lies going back to FDR to try to change the subject and fog up reality... That is their strongest suit for which I do offer them credit for refining into an art form but...

...let's get real here... The Repubs want nothing in the way of reform... No, make that absolutely nothing...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 02:43 PM

Amos et al,

I'm waiting on the reply to the answer demanded of Saws...

He provided the answer, with clickies. Too bad it is being ignored.





"Now be adivsed that Goldman Sachs donated $994,795 to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign."

"And how much did they contribute to McCain's campaign? "
Goldman Sachs $230,095 "




As I have stated, and been personnaly abused by Amos and others-

"Obama, bought and paid for."

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 12:06 PM

"I have always said he has good intentions, however political pressures prevent people from doing what they want to do.""

So you advocate just giving up?

GUTLESS!!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 08:24 AM

Blank -brain is a no brainer.... Jail is almost too good for him... I'd say a year living the the projects would be more appropriate...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Apr 10 - 12:13 AM

Finally!!!! Something that is agreed upon!!!
A lot of CORRUPT politicians should join him there, too!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 08:38 PM

Yes, Rigs, he should....

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 01:38 PM

Lloyd Blankfein should be in jail.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 01:27 PM

"Obama looks to be trying to do something about it (he appears to have honest intentions), so instead of pissing and moaning, why not get behind him and prove that you can change things."

I have always said he has good intentions, however political pressures prevent people from doing what they want to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 01:37 AM

Prefer 'Grey Goose'?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 01:11 AM

What about the bottle of Rum?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Apr 10 - 12:46 AM

How do you do it, Little Hawk??...and Bill D. You seem the only ones on here who understand plain English...WITHOUT THE SPIN of party politics!

All of you out there, who are looking to a political party to govern you..you are only in for disappointment, and heartache!!! If you want to be governed, fairly, LOOK TO YOUR MORALS!...and have dialogue, to and from those others, who do. Speak to them there! To try to change the minds and hearts of people, through legislation, especially corrupt legislation, is complete lunacy!!...and really, Haven't we seen enough corrupt legislation and stupid ideas passed into law???

Look at all the bickering, and tug of war over some bullshit, that some crooked political hack took bribes from 'special interests' to convince you that it was a 'good idea'????...and then you, in turn spit nails at those who clock it for what it is??...a set-up, that has a hidden agenda in it, that ultimately will cost you more of your freedom, money, or family members!!

Maybe it makes you feel important to be an astute expert in something...........even if its bullshit!!

By the way, Little Hawk, YO-HO!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:01 AM

Good point, Don... I think that the progressives have been beaten down so badly by the right over the last 30 years that they instictually expect for things to not turn out well... It's mindset that the right does not have... The right just keep plugging away toward their narrow minded, intolerant society that they see as their utopia...

The left??? No so...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 03:58 AM

""I see a slightly different interpretation of what GfS asserts:
"...both sides are immensely corrupt, and bought off, by the corporatist mega rich.""

Maybe so Bill, but it's the defeatism of the response which infuriates me.

Obama looks to be trying to do something about it (he appears to have honest intentions), so instead of pissing and moaning, why not get behind him and prove that you can change things.

Take a look at human history, and see how many times this situation has pertained, in one form or another, and good, honest, men have made a difference, and things have changed.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:07 AM

Quick review in case anyone missed it...

Goldman Sachs donated $994,795 to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.

and...

Goldman Sachs donated $230,095 to McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.

And here's a chart of all their political contributions (bribes):

Goldman Sachs money....where it went in 2008 election year

To point this out, and to point out that BOTH sides of the partisan divide are deeply corrupt and have been bought out by major financial interests is NOT to say that "nothing makes any difference"....it is to offer ordinary people a chance to finally wake UP and take on the real enemy somehow instead of remaining hypnotized by the eternal politically partisan left/right dichotomy that is there mainly just to keep them distracted with fighting each other, and make them NOT look at or go after the real enemy, which is the corrupt big money financial entities who fund the political campaigns...and they fund BOTH sides!

There isn't one party that's good in this corrupt system and another that's evil. There is a vast system of institutionalized graft already in place which choreographs and manipulates both sides no matter which one wins. How many individual politicians have the guts to fight that? A very tiny handful of them. Those are the people who need your help, no matter which party they are in. You have to see beyond old partisan habits and develop independent and truly revolutionary thinking to change what is going on. Old-style party line stuff is just more smoke and mirrors and it will not end the graft in Washington (and elsewhere).

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 10:13 PM

Bobert, I agree that it makes sense to regulate these markets. I don't see that it would cost nearly as much money to pay regulators as it does to bail out banks.

             That having been said, my original post was in the form of a question--this isn't something I know very much about, so I'm curious--why does the administation leave Feddy and Fanny out of the equation?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:44 PM

Yeah, same old arguments... We can't possibly afford to pay people to regulate so lets just let the various segments of the economy regulate themselves...

This is exactly what the right is pushin' here... But the right has turned out to be the fat cats and anyone with an I.Q. on the downwind side of a hundred that the fat cats can maipulate (think Tea Party folks here)...

The problem is that these industries have now had 30 years of having it their way and in the words of Dr. Phil, "How's it workin' for you?"...

It bothers me that in the midst of all this and Obama going to New York to have a little talk with Wall St. that, if I am not mistaken, the stock markets ended the day on the plus side...

Is the fix in??? Maybe??? I hope not, but maybe...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:29 PM

Cost of Rigs... program?

Good thing that it would never fly.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:12 PM

Wow what a non sequitur.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 07:34 PM

Q - Your support of the Reagan concept of ever expanding markets, requiring ever expanding populations demonstrates your inability to grasp realities.

                            I would agree that the lending agencies should check on the validity of the applicants, but they don't, and haven't.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 06:00 PM

Rigs, do you know how many mortgages are issued each year? There were 79 million home equity loans extant in 2006. Who will pay for the thousands of new Federal government workers to check applications, and to verify the credit status of each applicant, all of which is done locally by the lending institutions and the credit check companies licensed in the State?

Would you move all of this to a federal venue far from where the mortgage is applied? Would federal employees take over enforcing local inspection rules which must be satisfied as part of the mortgage application? Would Federal employees know local situations?

A slow down in the home equity market would put construction workers, building component factory and sales personnel, developers, etc. ot of work- probably cutting a million workers or more in many fields.

What nonsense!