Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Maine legalizes gay marriage
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 36 of 92 (507769)
05-07-2009 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Artemis Entreri
05-07-2009 9:34 PM


quote:
made it illegal for pharmacists to refuse to give out the drug even on religious grounds.
If they want to impose their morals they need to find a different profession. Try some sort of lame ass ministry maybe. They are licensed by the state so they need to to what ever is legal, not what they feel is moral.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Artemis Entreri, posted 05-07-2009 9:34 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 62 of 92 (508060)
05-10-2009 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Michamus
05-10-2009 1:29 AM


Re: Missed it Taz
quote:
but I think we have had enough of the government as a brooding overlord.
Of yeah, because it was too much regulation that has led to the crap that happened with the banks and wall street to force us into the financial mess we are in. Without federal government mandates don't you think the deep south would still be apartheid-like?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Michamus, posted 05-10-2009 1:29 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Michamus, posted 05-10-2009 1:44 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 64 of 92 (508093)
05-10-2009 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Michamus
05-10-2009 1:44 PM


Re: Missed it Taz
quote:
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
Right wing talking point. Fannie and Freddie had little or nothing to do with the mortgage crisis. The fact they ;ended to lower income people has little or nothing to do with the mortgage crisis.
You should look at facts not right wing talking points
But here's the thing: Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the explosion of high-risk lending a few years ago, an explosion that dwarfed the S.& L. fiasco. In fact, Fannie and Freddie, after growing rapidly in the 1990s, largely faded from the scene during the height of the housing bubble.
Partly that's because regulators, responding to accounting scandals at the companies, placed temporary restraints on both Fannie and Freddie that curtailed their lending just as housing prices were really taking off. Also, they didn't do any subprime lending, because they can't: the definition of a subprime loan is precisely a loan that doesn't meet the requirement, imposed by law, that Fannie and Freddie buy only mortgages issued to borrowers who made substantial down payments and carefully documented their income.
Source
Here is a conservative blasting the meme that the CRA was the cause of the mortgage crisis.
To really prove that CRA was an insignificant factor, what one really needs to do is identify those areas most helped by the real estate boom and also those areas with the most foreclosures. If all these Conservatives are correct, then the real estate boom would have centered most of all in most of the poorest areas of the country and the current crisis in foreclosures would also be the same. In other words, the years 2003-2007 should have then seen an explosion in areas like Bedford Stuyvesant in New York, Englewood in Chicago, and Compton in California, and on the flip side those areas should be leading the pack for foreclosures now.
Instead, the biggest concentrations of foreclosures can be found in well to do areas like Boca Raton, Riverside County near San Diego, and of course Las Vegas. Does anyone really believe that there was an explosion of lending in Vegas because banks were attempting to meet some sort of quota of lending to poor folks? In fact, the real estate boom had a fairly negligible effect on the poorest areas of the country. In fact, the same areas Boca, Phoenix, Miami, and Vegas that boomed the most during the height of the real estate market are also now the ones suffering the most now that it is over. We aren't have a mortgage meltdown because there is an explosion of foreclosures in Englewood, though foreclosures likely exploded there, but in Phoenix and Las Vegas. To attributed the mortgage meltdown to the CRA is to assign altruism to the mortgage meltdown. We don't have a crisis because banks were trying too hard to lend to the downtrodden. We have a mortgage crisis because banks were trying too hard to lend in booming areas.
quote:
Was it the government, or was it great civil rights activists such as Dr. King, and Rosa Parks? (to name a few)
They made noise but without government action it would have stayed the same. Black were a minority, there is no way they could get the majority to implement the changes. The changes were implemented by the executive branch and the judiciary. TO say Dr. King and Rosa Parks were the ones that implemented the changes is a specious argument at best.
quote:
Government is always behind, is always wasteful, and is always looking for "what's in it for them".
This is an opinion not fact. Speaking in absolutes is a dangerous thing. So we should privatize police protection, disaster relief, all education? So if people are wealthy enough to have a voice and afford services, good for them? Let the rest suck eggs?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Michamus, posted 05-10-2009 1:44 PM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Michamus, posted 05-10-2009 4:30 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 68 of 92 (508105)
05-10-2009 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Michamus
05-10-2009 4:30 PM


Re: Missed it Taz
quote:
Since when has a NY Times article been a "Right wing talking point"?
Your original link does not in anyway bolster your argument that Fannie Mae was responsible for the mortgage crisis. The article was written in 1999, just a few years before the crisis. Maybe you can find something post crisis, or at least from this century.
I think the repeal of Glass-Steagal had a much greater affect.
Oh and by the way. I love how you don't even bother to counter my arguments about Fannie Mae and CRA.
I believe the federal government does a lot of good. Evidently, you don't. That is fine. I like my interstate highways, I like that we have uniform commerce laws, I like that the government regulates the economy and corporations.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Michamus, posted 05-10-2009 4:30 PM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Michamus, posted 05-11-2009 6:41 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 72 of 92 (508187)
05-11-2009 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Michamus
05-11-2009 6:41 AM


Re: Missed it Taz
quote:
Perhaps you should read the second part of the article I quoted?
So how does an article from 1999 prophecize the economic problems of 2009?
You keep saying this article shows that Fannie Mae is responsible for the economic crisis. It is a ten year old article. Yes it highlights some of the risks involved but it cannot show that it was the cause of a crisis in 2009. That would be magic.
I have shown current data showing that your premise is false. Again maybe you can find something current to back your belief.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Michamus, posted 05-11-2009 6:41 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Michamus, posted 05-11-2009 7:59 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 77 of 92 (508254)
05-11-2009 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Michamus
05-11-2009 7:58 PM


Re: Missed it Taz
quote:
I would prefer to allow people to be people, and let the government worry about what it was founded for... Tariffs, Managing a Navy, and any inter-state affairs.
Wow are you idealistic. People have never let other people live the way they want. Local governments and state governments have always shown a propensity to enforce the will of the majority upon the minority. The Constitution has mechanisms in it to prevent the tyranny of the majority.
Your views are idealistic not not practical in the real world. Since the days of the signing of the Constitution we have had some changes because States tyrannized the minority. Women and Blacks can now vote, slavery is illegal. Many of the founding fathers were very in favor of a strong Federal government. You speak as if the founding fathers all wanted a weak federal government. This is not true. Have you heard of the Federalists vs the Demoratic-Republicans? The states rights issue has been a huge issue throughout US history. I disagree with your simplistic take on it.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Michamus, posted 05-11-2009 7:58 PM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Michamus, posted 05-13-2009 2:03 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 81 of 92 (508393)
05-13-2009 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Michamus
05-13-2009 2:03 AM


Re: Missed it Taz
quote:
Non-sequitor. We are discussing federal gov't.[
No it isn't a non-sequitpr. It is my point why we need a strong federal.
quote:
A great portion of them did want a weak federal government.
actually no, it was pretty much an even split.
quote:
I am pretty sure anyone with even a decent US History education knows about the Federalists. Who the heck are the Demoratic-Republicans? I mean, I've read about the Democratic-Republicans...
Would you like a tutorial on early US history? Or are you happy with your fantasy rendition?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Michamus, posted 05-13-2009 2:03 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Michamus, posted 05-13-2009 2:28 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 83 of 92 (508395)
05-13-2009 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Michamus
05-13-2009 2:28 AM


Re: Missed it Taz
Nice rebuttal to my points.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Michamus, posted 05-13-2009 2:28 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Michamus, posted 05-13-2009 1:25 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024