Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

HoustonMilfDebbie · 01-07-2015, 11:36 PM

She's real; please watch and share:

http://youtu.be/nTWfa-iO9Nc

JD Barleycorn · 01-08-2015, 01:59 AM

I'm sorry, but your prospective is so skewed that I can't take anything you say seriously. Destroyed? Such violent imagery from a lib.

Anyway, I did watch Warren's part of the video and here is what she forgot or assumed, there were many economic downturns that did not reach the point of crisis in the late 30s, the late 50s, the middle 70s, the late 90s, and the late oughts. Did banks fail during this time? According to Warren they didn't but she is wrong there. Banks fail all the time. She did mention the S & L scandal of the 80s but she got it wrong that Glass-Steagall would have prevented it. The reason we had the crisis is that a senator named Metzenbaum decided that he didn't like people getting over on the government by being able to deduct their home mortgagoe interest. So he put in a bill that reduced the deduction by half. A lot of Savings and Loans used real estate and homes as their assets. Once the deduction became so much less the value of property dropped and that means the value of the assets dropped. Which led to S & Ls losing billions of dollars in value. The runs began and they just did not have the money on hand to pay people. They failed and it was up to George HW Bush to pay off the bills. So about 180 billion a year had to be paid by Bush right up until Clinton became president. Clinton never had to make one single payment so his budget looked so much better by comparison, an unfair comparison by the way. So anyway the 1980s had nothing to do with what Warren is talking about. It was Clinton who presided over the repeal of Glass-Steagall but once again, she was not completely honest. The beginning of the 2008 crash came from Fannie and Freddie (which are not banks) and spread to the investment industry and from there to the banks because Fannie and Freddie were passing bad paper off as assets. Now maybe Glass-Steagall would have prevented the banks from investing in this bad paper but it did have the good house keeping seal of the federal government so maybe not. No, there were a lot of reasons for the recession but Warren puts too much credit on what she is proposing....if it is Glass-Steagall II.

Of course it would be nice if you had the courage to make your own comments.

Guest040616 · 01-08-2015, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm sorry, but your prospective is so skewed that I can't take anything you say seriously. Destroyed? Such violent imagery from a lib.

The above referenced post was brought to us by JDIdiot who recently advocated for Louie Gohmert to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Guest040616 · 01-08-2015, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm sorry, but your prospective is so skewed that I can't take anything you say seriously.

The above referenced post was brought to us by JDIdiot who recently advocated for Louie Gohmert to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

JD Barleycorn · 01-08-2015, 02:46 AM

Nuff said by Tampon. I know he didn't read or understand what I wrote. I was speaking at a 7th grade level or over his head.

Guest040616 · 01-08-2015, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Nuff said by Tampon. I know he didn't read or understand what I wrote. I was speaking at a 7th grade level or over his head.

The above referenced post was brought to us by JDIdiot who recently advocated for Louie Gohmert to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

LexusLover · 01-08-2015, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Nuff said by Tampon. I know he didn't read or understand what I wrote. I was speaking at a 7th grade level or over his head.

Actually, I give him a little more credit, since he has cut and pasted so much from the Houston Chronicle over the years ..... 11th grade level......

(THE PROBLEM is he apparently was not comprehending ALL OF IT FIRST!)

So, you might be closer to being correct. I was giving him some "doubt benefit"!

Guest040616 · 01-08-2015, 05:21 AM

Patriarch Idiot and the Idiot in Waiting.

How touching!

Guest123018-4 · 01-08-2015, 06:10 AM

Does anybody watch CNBC?

lustylad · 01-08-2015, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Does anybody watch CNBC?

Sure, I do. Watching it right now. Dow is up 242 points. As for Debbie's video, it is a toss-up who is the bigger idiot - Elizabeth Warren with her superficial interpretation of US financial history or the smarmy asshole (Cenk Uygur) who says stupid things like "everyone at CNBC works for the banks".

Why do so many people out there think ALL regulation is good? That's as absurd as saying all derivatives are bad, another lame idea I personally "destroyed" on one of Debbie's earlier threads. Look, there is smart regulation and dumb regulation. I can't say in which category I would assign the bill Warren was proposing because no one in the video even talks about what is in it. Of course, details don't matter to sheeple like Debbie who worship Elizabeth Warren. They simply follow the "we-need-to-pass-the-bill-to-find-out-what's-in-it" philosophy of government.

WTF · 01-08-2015, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lustylad

Why do so many people out there think ALL regulation is good? That's as absurd as saying all derivatives are bad,.

Why do some folks think all regulations are bad?

Depending on where one stands will be the view of rather a bill is good or bad.

Is that to hard a concept for you to understand?

LexusLover · 01-08-2015, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Does anybody watch CNBC?

I've seen it on the "menu" .... scanning by.

She needs to show herself in person between 7 and 10 on Fox....

... for a discussion of the issues. It might help Hillarious.

LexusLover · 01-08-2015, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WTF

Why do some folks think all regulations are bad?

Depending on where one stands will be the view of rather a bill is good or bad.

Is that to hard a concept for you to understand?

NO!

lustylad · 01-08-2015, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WTF

Why do some folks think all regulations are bad?

Depending on where one stands will be the view of rather a bill is good or bad.

Is that to hard a concept for you to understand?

Do you even know how to read, fagboy? I specifically stated "THERE IS SMART REGULATION AND THERE IS DUMB REGULATION". To find out which is being proposed, you need to read the fucking bill before you jump on the Warren bandwagon and say pass it.

Is that too hard a concept for you to understand? Don't jump to conclusions? Don't pre-judge? Maybe, just maybe, try to find out what's in a bill before you make up your closed little mind?

.

WTF · 01-08-2015, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lustylad

Do you even know how to read, fagboy? I specifically stated "THERE IS SMART REGULATION AND THERE IS DUMB REGULATION". To find out which is being proposed, you need to read the fucking bill before you jump on the Warren bandwagon and say pass it.

Is that too hard a concept for you to understand? Don't jump to conclusions? Don't pre-judge? Maybe, just maybe, try to find out what's in a bill before you make up your closed little mind?

.

You are half way there dong dinger...

Smart or Dumb depends on one's viewpoint.

No matter the bill, there will be some that think it dumb and some that think it smart.

So take you own advice and quit jumping to conclusions...