Send Flowers to Russia, Ukraine and Worldwide with Cyber-Florist.com Fiance.com: Beautiful Russian brides
Home  |  About  |  Forum  |  User Blogs  |  Login  |  Register

	Create New Topic   My Posts   My forum buddies   Invite friends   Private messages Russian brides > Main Forum > Scam?? Author Post durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 11:45:45 AM   I don't like to get involved in political debate here, but I do have a principle (nas take note): we are each entitled to our own opinion, but we are not entitled to our own facts. Government intervention in the housing market, specifically the encouragement of mortgage lending to low-income families, was a policy of the 8-year Clinton administration AND the 8-year Bush administration. G. W. Bush made numerous statements about this, and was proud of his policies to extend home ownership into low-income and specifically minority demographics. For a little info, see http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/23/102817/214/793/607383 This is a liberal blog, so if you like disregard the editorial content, and read only the boxed quotations! My reading of the evidence is that the Bush 43 administration continued and intensified low-income home ownership policies of the Clinton administration. Do you believe that 8 more years of these policies, did not substantially contribute to the crisis? To simplify this history to "Clinton did it" is a distortion. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 1:01:16 PM   Durak, research the Glass-Steagall act first them tell me something more than what the daily Kos has to say. Glass Steagall may not stopped it but would have isolated the collapse in certain markets. I was no fan of either Bush, so it has nothing to do with democrat or republican. Making comments of home ownership has little to do with the actual destructive force behind it. Danny you don't even want to get into a a spelling contest or anything above what a third grader might now. It would expose you for the idiot you really are. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 1:27:53 PM   nas, I agree with you 100% on Glass-Steagall; its repeal was a destructive act (I had a bad feeling about it at the time) that certainly took place during the Clinton years. G W Bush did not just make comments. Did you read the link? It includes statements from the White House about actions, not just words! From wikipedia, "On December 16, 2003, President George W. Bush signed the American Dream Downpayment Act, a new program that provided grants to help home buyers with downpayment and closing costs. The act authorized $200 million dollars per year for the program for fiscal years 2004-2007." And this is just one of several actions that the previous administration took, that increased home ownership among low-income families. At least arguably, this contributed to the wave of bad mortgages. To say that the Bush administration caused the crisis is a foolish oversimplification. Likewise, to lay the massive lending to poorly qualified homebuyers (which mostly occurred well after 2000) at the feet of the Clinton administration. I think we can both agree, that greed is not limited to any one political party. To those who believe that the crisis was caused by socialism, G W Bush gave Clinton good competition for "socialist cred" when it came to home ownership policy. GeminiDreams Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 3:01:21 PM   Nas you should change you nick here to two watt as that is about how bright your are. You havent provided any rational backup to your theory but I will blow it out of the water completely for you. Houses bought when Clinton was in power would have most likely defaulted in 2003 -04 latest as balloon payments would have kicked in by then. However due to loose money supply house prices would have risen sufficiently that defaulting loans would still be in the money. The Government did not underwite the loans. Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac guaranted loans but were publicly listed entities. AIG insured loans and lost about $150 b in the process. They had no government imperetive. They gave the geniuses that wrote this business $300 m in bonuses to keep them happy! A degree in political science and you still really dont have an idea what a socialist is. My very reason for calling out DCV. Im sure you will blame Clinton for forcing the car industry to keep producing big gas guzzling cars. The reality is that business rarely gets lumbered with anything it doesnt want to do. They pay lobbyist vast amounts to bribe poiticians to ensure it doesnt happen. Banks wanted to lend money to poor people as poor people defaulting pay the highest interes and the most fees. Conspiracy theories belong to morons like yourself. BTW Im not European and Im not a Socialist and have no desire to live in Scandanavia or the US. By the time the US awakes from its slumber it will find itself neck deep in sand on the beach with the tide coming in. Or is that drowning from the icemelt of global warming. GeminiDreams Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 3:06:13 PM   DCV the farms were taken over by tribal groups with political connections. They were not taken over by the army, police or any direct government action. It was outright theft. There were no colletives and most of this land is now back to subsistance cropping. There were a handful of landowner deaths not slaughter. Most saw the writing on the wall and got out while the going was good. Any more good fantasies to add? nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 3:14:59 PM   Gemini I'm laughing my ass off. You need to go back, light up that spliff and put on the Moody Blues. AIG is another interesting adventure in you actual lack of knowledge what happened there. Who was in charge at the time of AIG's collapse. It sure wasn't the owner and founder who guided the ship to it's dominance in the market. What happened to him? Maybe you would like to enlighten us with your acumen on that subject. What does gas guzzling Cars have to do with an artificial markert such as OPEC? OPEC is nothing more than the Federal Reserve for the Oil countries. Only a socialist would espouse the nonsense you toss here, especially the stupidity of global warming. I guess you have a copy of the Inconvenient truth on your coffee table right next to your rolling papers. Maybe you would like to get into an in depth discussion of Gramsci, Alinksy, or Chomsky? Even better the number one visitor to the White House George Soros. Sounds like you spend too much time reading the daily Kos. Two Watt that's funny, another greenie crying the sky is falling the sky is falling. Business doesn't get lumbered? Hmmm Osha, EPA, and the litany of agencies that drive up costs but do very little. Same will happen with health care. Durak, no I haven't read the article, but I will. I put as much creedence in the Kos as I do Matt Drudge. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 3:51:18 PM   nasfan, I don't recommend trusting Kos, or any other blog. I only linked to them because it is a brief post that conveniently collects some source material. Just read the quotations from G. W. Bush, his White House, and print press, and verify them as much as you like. I'm talking facts, not opinion. PS If you think that global warming is a political matter, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change < br> Of course, it is possible that all of these scientists are really propagandists for some socialist cabal. Kirkland Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 3:53:27 PM   Socialism is foisted onto those who don't want it by those who don't need it. Capitalism is foisted by those who want it onto those who need it. The problem I see with America is, while extolling the virtues of capitalism, they are in turn exporting ther economy to communist dictatorships simply to reap the rewards of exploitation. Economies in the western world who don't go down this route will find themselves at a disadvatage. Empires can only be built and sustained on the backs of slave labour or explotation of resources. dcv Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 6:55:30 PM   Gemini. Not sure what planet you are speaking from. "tribal groups with political connections" is like saying the Japs in world war 2 were missionaries in China. Go on try and convince us all that Erich Honecker(East Germany( and Pol Pot(cambodia), CeauCescu(romania) were Not socialist too? Welcome to reality. gecko Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 9:54:41 PM   its true their are countries where the standard of living is better than in america. but you cannot compare a country like sweden to us. USA is a very diverse and complicated country. The black experience in america is very different than the jewish experience. it would be more fair to compare sweden to the swedish living in american. to compare mexicans to the mexicans living in usa. africans to the africans living in usa. etc. etc. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 10:13:34 PM   Zanla and Zipra were funded by our friends the Soviets and Chicoms. Were trained in neighboring countries with Soviet advisors next to Rhodesia as it was called then. It wasn't just some rag tag tribal groups. Initially the Bush War started as isolated attacks on white owned farms but escalated after 1972. Jimmy Carter handed over Rhodesia to the communist Mugabe and as usual did nothing to stop the spread of communism. The bullshit spewed that this was liberation of Black Rhodesia in nonsense. Mugabe is a tyrant, dictator and Marxist. If it was the liberation of black Rhodesia why were so many blacks fighting for the UDI? They knew what tyranny was ahead for them with a Mugabe government. Many of these rag tag soldiers were trained in the Soviet Union also. 30000 deaths on both sides is a little more than a handful, along with the killing of innocent people on air craft. One incident the survivors of the crash were executed by the insurgents. I was in Salsbury in 78 the place was a mad house. Many former Viet Nam vets fought in the Bush wars, 5 died trying to stop Mugabe and his henchmen. Atrocities were on both sides but nothing like what Zanla and Zipra was capable of, especially innocent civilians. South Africa set up refugee camps and sent some of their army in to make sure the refugees arrived in SA safely. I've had this discussion with Thunderdome and he could provide much insight into this Since he is a resident of South Africa. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/3/2009 10:23:47 PM   Kirkland pretty decent observation, I've had issues with trading with the Chinese for years. Since it isn't a level playing field. Every fair trade agreement the US has gotten involved in has left American labor holding the short end of the stick. We've given up our manufacturing base to bow at the altar of global warming. Though the real abusers aren't cited because the weak knee's in the west don't have the balls to do it. I had long battled philosophically with protective tariffs. After researching Teddy Roosevelts administration, I found that tariffs brought in more money than future imposed income taxes did. It has come now to a choice of printing more dollars and devauling the currency or find some other structure, which protective tariffs would help. I have no problem paying extra for Made is USA products to stop funding the communists who have learned to use capitalism as a weapon to impose their agenda, which shows just what a fraud communism is and was. GeminiDreams Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 6:45:46 AM   Socialism refers to various theories of economic organization advocating public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with a method of compensation based on the amount of labor expended. Most socialists share the view that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and derives its wealth through exploitation, creates an unequal society, does not provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximise their potentialities and does not utilise technology and resources to their maximum potential nor in the interests of the public. The Marxist conception of socialism is that of a specific historical phase that will displace capitalism and be a precursor to communism. The major characteristics of socialism (particularly as conceived by Marx and Engels after the Paris Commune of 1871), are that the proletariat will control the means of production through a workers' state erected by the workers in their interests. Economic activity is still organised through the use of incentive systems and social classes would still exist but to a lesser and diminishing extent than under capitalism. For orthodox Marxists, socialism is the lower stage of communism based on the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution" while upper stage communism is based on the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"; the upper stage becoming possible only after the socialist stage further develops economic efficiency and the automation of production has led to a superabundance of goods and services. Quoted from Wikipedia as it is simple enough for the morons to understand. For all Nas' political science degree he obviously has no understanding of the fundamentals. DCV is obviously totally ignorant but I dont think it is possible to educate him. Basically show where any of the regimes demonstrated these principles. They do not and never intended to govern on behalf of the people or for the workers to benefit from their labours. Read Animal Farm by George Orwell. He put it rather well about replacing one tyrannical dictatorship with another through what was meant to be a socialist revolution but with the completely opposite outcome. Its just a confidence trick. If I say I will transform thing to provide you with a better life I will get your support. If I dont deliver on the promise do I deserve the label or support??? The Socialits governments you mentioned didnt act as socialists but as dictatorships or oligarchies. You are using a label but the contents of the bottle are not is what is on the label. GeminiDreams Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 8:41:53 AM   Nas obviously you cant read and comprehend? Get that degree from a cereal packet? The farms were taken over in 2000 by militias connected to fighters from the independance days. They had support to do this by the government but was mainly illegal. As with many of these conflicts (Vietnam is another good example) the colonial elite refused to see the change in world circumstances and instead of mapping out orderly transitions to democratically elected governments tried to retain their priveledged position. The outcome was not Carters to give. It was the right of the people or are you suggesting that they should have deferred to the superior worldy knowledge of the white elite and not have democracy? Were the not allowed to fight for democracy? Maybe you dont think black people should vote or get to run their own countries? If they want to fight for control are they not allowed to get support from whoever will give it? Its not as though the US has not also supported dictators with dubious human rights records. For some years Zimbabwe was held as an example of a good transition where whites and blacks coexisted after democracy prevailed. However as you coretly stated Mugabe is a tyrant and a dictator and quashed opposition and basically destroyed the country for his and his cronies benefit, not the benefit of the people as a socialist would. Zimbabweans got the animal farm scenario and I guess someone else will need to step up to fight and restore the dream. By the way I have read one Chomsky book, two michael Moore books and seen 3 Mike Moore films. They are so funny. It would be even better being able to watch your reactions. I suggest you read Orwells 1984 as US is choosing this route. I dont think I will bother responding to any more on this as clearly it is pointless and as with you Martin and Danny just deteriorates into tedium without much service to the forum. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 11:11:22 AM   Read it a long time ago Gemini. Gemini are you a disgruntled expat like Worldtrav02 was who likes to bad mouth the US in foreign countries? One they didn't have support from the government or you have just contradicted your previous state saying they weren't attached to any nor had any support of any government. Might want to look back at your previous post. I wouldn't insult my intelligence to read Chomsky, Moore since I can get all the same information from the communist manifesto, it's just the same repackaged garbage. Idiot danny, typo's are far from incorrect spelling which you do all the time, try working on the words "even" and "because" before you try to correct me you stupid moron. Someone teach you to use spell check retard? Steagall is a name of a writer of a banking act that you wouldn't know crap about. Nice try. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 1:03:21 PM   Label your wikipedia anyway you want it is a centralization of power and elimination of freedoms. Which in itself is tyrannical. Socialism opens the door for elimination of liberty. Just like democracies, which the United States is not one. No socialist country in the history of man has given ownership of all services and industry anywhere to all individuals. Not even your sacred Denmark, Sweden, Norway or Finland. You in theory can have equal access but the reality is the dynamics makes it impossible. When you take from one to give to another that is theft of resources. Socialism has been a dismal failure because the producers will not tolerate their assests given to the non productive. GeminiDreams Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 1:11:21 PM   Two watt read it again there is no contradiction. I see you are good at the labelling tactic in arguing. Just label someone and you dont have to provide any rational aguement to them. Hes a Socialist, lefty commie, raghead, insurgent, terrorist, rebel or whatever slogan of the weeks passes. The reality is you know nothing about me. All along you are assuming I am a Socialist because I call you and your mates out about being ignorant. I have actually said nothing here to support Socialism. Im just pointing out your totally misguided interpretation of business and life in general and all you ever come back with is 'oooooooooooh the Socialist boogieman is to blame' 'or you dont know or understand this' followed by a crock of bull. I noticed you didnt answer my simple questions above did you? It was the right of the people or are you suggesting that they should have deferred to the superior worldy knowledge of the white elite and not have democracy? Were they not allowed to fight for democracy? Maybe you dont think black people should vote or get to run their own countries? If they want to fight for control are they not allowed to get support from whoever will give it? Danny keep it up we would want Nas to think he is too superior do we. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 3:33:30 PM   Uh, Gemini, it wasn't a fight about democracy now who doesn't understand what it was about. When the Lancaster deal was brokered and Ian Smith urged the whites not to leave, they did, because they knew what was in store with Mugabe and his backers, The Soviets and the Chinese. Now who's the idiot. Now I know what pisses you off about DCV. It's the flag, and you have the balls to call others ignorant? It shows little of what you know of American history, because to you all that flag stands for is racism, which is not what the Confederate Flag is about. Though I can tell you were public schooled. You make the claims that I don't know what or who you are, you're wrong. Because you are being judgmental about DCV and immediatelyl labeling him a racist. I guess it's a crime to stand up for your rights if your a white American male. You can try to package your agenda anyway you want. It's Like Lee Harvey Oswald saying he wasn't a communist, but a Marxist-Leninist. As us souther boys say, dog don't hunt in my woods. GeminiDreams Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/4/2009 4:18:14 PM   Show me where I said anything about DCVs flag. You cant tell anything Nas about my schooling. I can tell you this though that in my psyhcological testing my ranking was in top 2% for university graduates. Still didnt answer my questions Nas. Guess you are embarrassed to write your real perspective and all your previous bull amounts to nothing if you go for the correct answer. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/5/2009 4:57:43 AM   Danny you're the one who buys wives and promises building houses. I'm sure many other things since you lack culture of any sort. You are a Wife Liar, first not evern,(so you can understand) getting married, then not getting married. I mean what is it? The only way you could get a woman is if it was bought and paid for. End of story moron. Your Reply: Your name:   New Registration Password:   Forgot password?   refresh Code:   Russian brides > Main Forum > Scam??
	Pages: 1 2 3 4