Major component of Dodd-Frank done away with... Yeah!!

[RollRedRoll]

I read in the paper that the Republicans were successful in getting one of the key components of the Dodd-Frank Act erased from the law. The banks will now once again be able to make risky investments with federally insured money, putting the taxpayers right back on the hook. This is why Republicans suck... because this is the **** they fight for. It makes me angry because they are always saying we need to cut spending for anything that helps the little guy, but have no qualms about risking potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money to help some of the richest ******* people on the planet get even richer by privatizing the gains and nationalizing the losses... again. Don't get me wrong the Dems are just as culpable in this, but at least they support legislation that helps regular people too. One would think after the disaster that occurred a few years ago largely due to deregulation, the last thing we'd want to do is let the banks go back to the same casino where they pissed away all that money the first time.

 

[EdReed4Prez]

Actually agreed with Elizabeth Warren on one issue. If a company is too big to fail, they are too big. Should've busted up the banks. Won't vote for fauxcahontas' socialist ***, but she's right on that.

 

[Rod Farva]

I read in the paper that the Republicans were successful in getting one of the key components of the Dodd-Frank Act erased from the law. The banks will now once again be able to make risky investments with federally insured money, putting the taxpayers right back on the hook. This is why Republicans suck... because this is the **** they fight for. It makes me angry because they are always saying we need to cut spending for anything that helps the little guy, but have no qualms about risking potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money to help some of the richest ******* people on the planet get even richer by privatizing the gains and nationalizing the losses... again. Don't get me wrong the Dems are just as culpable in this, but at least they support legislation that helps regular people too. One would think after the disaster that occurred a few years ago largely due to deregulation, the last thing we'd want to do is let the banks go back to the same casino where they pissed away all that money the first time.

Geeze, that started out so well. Then came the bolded part. You really believe that ****? They are ALL in it for themselves and the dems are probably actually worse than the r's in that regard.

You do know that Dodd/Fwank was the cause of the housing market collapse right? Multi hundred thousand dollar mortgages were flowing like lies at an Obama presser. Flowing to completely unqualified "regular" people who could never in their wildest dreams pay them back, all in the interest of "fairness."

Please fill us in on the numerous dem championed pieces of legislation that have helped the "regular" folk?

 

[Vader]

I read in the paper that the Republicans were successful in getting one of the key components of the Dodd-Frank Act erased from the law. The banks will now once again be able to make risky investments with federally insured money, putting the taxpayers right back on the hook. This is why Republicans suck... because this is the **** they fight for. It makes me angry because they are always saying we need to cut spending for anything that helps the little guy, but have no qualms about risking potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money to help some of the richest ******* people on the planet get even richer by privatizing the gains and nationalizing the losses... again. Don't get me wrong the Dems are just as culpable in this, but at least they support legislation that helps regular people too. One would think after the disaster that occurred a few years ago largely due to deregulation, the last thing we'd want to do is let the banks go back to the same casino where they pissed away all that money the first time.

It wasn't deregulation that caused the problem. It was the federal government forcing banks to loan money to low income people with no credit. Hell Bush even sent people to congress to try to reign in Fannie and Freddy. Why don't you watch just one example.. I have many others:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPoksfSf2nA

 

[Troglodyte]

I remember Clinton saying that everyone who wants to own a house should be able to own a house. I thought it sounded like a good idea. I didn't know what it would entail.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

The little-known and dirty little secret is that most of the people on Wall Street are Democrats.

 

[Steelr4evr]

It wasn't deregulation that caused the problem. It was the federal government forcing banks to loan money to low income people with no credit. Hell Bush even sent people to congress to try to reign in Fannie and Freddy. Why don't you watch just one example.. I have many others:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPoksfSf2nA

....ding ding ding we have a winner!!!!! I crack up when i hear democrats try to blame their policy failures on the republicans.That's the Obama administrations entire train wreck tenure. For the little guy...hahaha..yeah they keep slums,slums and keep growing that government tit under a false narrative of actually caring.

 

[ark steel]

I read in the paper that the Republicans were successful in getting one of the key components of the Dodd-Frank Act erased from the law. The banks will now once again be able to make risky investments with federally insured money, putting the taxpayers right back on the hook. This is why Republicans suck... because this is the **** they fight for. It makes me angry because they are always saying we need to cut spending for anything that helps the little guy, but have no qualms about risking potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money to help some of the richest ******* people on the planet get even richer by privatizing the gains and nationalizing the losses... again. Don't get me wrong the Dems are just as culpable in this, but at least they support legislation that helps regular people too. One would think after the disaster that occurred a few years ago largely due to deregulation, the last thing we'd want to do is let the banks go back to the same casino where they pissed away all that money the first time.

I not know if you have any good points or not. I can't read that.

Use
The
Enter
Key

kkthx

 

[SteelChip]

Here's the real deal with the Dodd-Frank rollback....

"By the way, about that campaign finance stuff, that everybody's upset about in the omnibus bill, I'm gonna tell you exactly what that is."

"We had a caller about it yesterday. Elizabeth Warren is now being credited as practically the only person in Washington standing up for the little guy via her opposition to some of the relaxation of regulations in Dodd-Frank and some of the campaign finance. The lady was fit to be tied. She was angry and she was right to be, because the limits have practically been obliterated, which means that corporate donors can just start giving left and right. It used to be a limit of $37,000. Now it's $737,000, something. It's incredible.

But the point of it, do you know why it's in there? You know why? The Republicans put it in. You know why it's in there, folks? This is how corporate America's gonna defeat the Tea Party. By allowing limitless donations from that crowd under the rubric that it's campaign finance and money is speech and freedom of speech and First Amendment. The theory is that Main Street, Tea Party people can't come close to competing with corporate money."
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/12/12/boehner_throws_in_with_obama

 

[Confluence]

The little-known and dirty little secret is that most of the people on Wall Street are Democrats.

Read the weekend WSJ. Take out the biz section and you'd think you had the NYT

 

[RollRedRoll]

Please fill us in on the numerous dem championed pieces of legislation that have helped the "regular" folk?

Well.. Let's see... There's social security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, all the legislation that had to do with allowed the organized labor movement to get off the ground...which probably was the biggest reason the middle class was able to become the middle class... the Civil Rights Act, unemployment insurance, SNAP,..... Is that enough or do you need more?

 

[RollRedRoll]

It wasn't deregulation that caused the problem. It was the federal government forcing banks to loan money to low income people with no credit. Hell Bush even sent people to congress to try to reign in Fannie and Freddy. Why don't you watch just one example.. I have many others:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPoksfSf2nA

So it was the poor people with no money and no power that were able to bring down the worlds largest economy. I'll bet they had no idea they were so powerful.

 

[Vader]

So it was the poor people with no money and no power that were able to bring down the worlds largest economy. I'll bet they had no idea they were so powerful.

I know your understanding of economics is severely limited but I'd think even you could grasp the concept of Fannie and Freddie securing loans to people who couldn't afford it can be problematic. I know that you knew that but you'd rather try to make false allegations because of your political beliefs. You can't even give credit to GWB for trying to do something about it. Typical liberal.

 

[ark steel]

.. the Civil Rights Act. Is that enough or do you need more?

Let's go with more:

more than 80% of Republicans in both houses voted in favor of the bill, compared with more than 60% of Democrats
Ohio's Republican Rep. William McCulloch had a conservative track record -- he opposed foreign and federal education aid and supported gun rights and school prayer. His district (the same one now represented by House Speaker John Boehner) had a small African-American population. So he had little to gain politically by supporting the Civil Rights Act. Yet he became a critical leader in getting the bill passed.

Virginia's Democratic Rep. Howard W. Smith was a staunch segregationist and strongly opposed the Civil Rights Act. Smith, who was chairman of the House Rules Committee, came up with many tactics to discourage the passage of the bill's Title VII, which would outlaw employment discrimination because of race, color, religion or national origin.

 

[RollRedRoll]

I know your understanding of economics is severely limited but I'd think even you could grasp the concept of Fannie and Freddie securing loans to people who couldn't afford it can be problematic. I know that you knew that but you'd rather try to make false allegations because of your political beliefs. You can't even give credit to GWB for trying to do something about it. Typical liberal.

My understanding of economics is poor? I understand that when a person's mortgage payment goes from $1100 a month to $2800 a month because some snake oil salesman type working at mortgage broker sold some poor unsuspecting family a mortgage he knew they couldn't afford but they didn't, they are probably gonna have trouble making the payments. But go ahead, blame the family who's only crime was trying to secure a decent home for themselves... Typical Republican....

 

[SCSteeler4life]

My understanding of economics is poor? I understand that when a person's mortgage payment goes from $1100 a month to $2800 a month because some snake oil salesman type working at mortgage broker sold some poor unsuspecting family a mortgage he knew they couldn't afford but they didn't, they are probably gonna have trouble making the payments. But go ahead, blame the family who's only crime was trying to secure a decent home for themselves... Typical Republican....

No that just proves you are ignorant, and are trying to live way beyond your means.

 

[RollRedRoll]

No that just proves you are ignorant, and are trying to live way beyond your means.

If a person isn't aware that their payments are going to double in 4 or 5 years but the person selling the mortgage does, how is that an example of the borrower being "ignorant" and "living beyond their means"? And don't even give me the "they should have read the fine print" line either. Educated people can't make heads or tails out of that "lawyer speak " type of language those contracts are written in. All the average workin' stiff wants to know is how much a month and for how long... and if the guy selling the loan isn't honest with them then the blame lies squarely on them. It's called predatory lending... look it up...

 

[SCSteeler4life]

If a person isn't aware that their payments are going to double in 4 or 5 years but the person selling the mortgage does, how is that an example of the borrower being "ignorant" and "living beyond their means"? And don't even give me the "they should have read the fine print" line either. Educated people can't make heads or tails out of that "lawyer speak " type of language those contracts are written in. All the average workin' stiff wants to know is how much a month and for how long... and if the guy selling the loan isn't honest with them then the blame lies squarely on them. It's called predatory lending... look it up...

Common sense tells you if you are buying a house you can afford or not. Same thing with cars. Everybody wants something they can't afford.

 

[ark steel]

If a person isn't aware that their payments are going to double in 4 or 5 years but the person selling the mortgage does, how is that an example of the borrower being "ignorant" and "living beyond their means"? And don't even give me the "they should have read the fine print" line either. Educated people can't make heads or tails out of that "lawyer speak " type of language those contracts are written in. All the average workin' stiff wants to know is how much a month and for how long... and if the guy selling the loan isn't honest with them then the blame lies squarely on them. It's called predatory lending... look it up...

You know the purpose of that huge sheaf of papers you have to sign, right? Everyone ******* about having to sign 50 bajillion pieces of paper for their mortgage.

I have, not to this day, had any bank force me to sign those papers.

 

[21STEELERS21]

Dodd/Frank passed in 2010, so it can't be the cause of the housing crisis. It was the fix that is suppose to prevent another crisis from occurring.

The real problem in Washington is both Dems and Repubs are mostly lawyers. We are being governed by one profession, because political office is a career move
for the legal profession. In the past, when Congress wasn't a full-time job, we use to elect a blend of professions: farmers, businessmen, doctors, etc...
They gave the government a diverse mindset that wanted to solve problems, so they could get things done and get back to their real lives.

 

[Rod Farva]

Well.. Let's see... There's social security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, all the legislation that had to do with allowed the organized labor movement to get off the ground...which probably was the biggest reason the middle class was able to become the middle class... the Civil Rights Act, unemployment insurance, SNAP,..... Is that enough or do you need more?

Was hoping for something from the past 4-5 decades. As for civil rights.........

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

http://humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/

You're no daisy....you're no daisy at all.

 

[RollRedRoll]

Was hoping for something from the past 4-5 decades. As for civil rights.........

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

http://humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/

You're no daisy....you're no daisy at all.

So you chastise me because my examples go back a few decades, and then turn around and ring the GOP's bell by citing **** they did back in the mid-1800's..... Nice...

 

[Rod Farva]

So you chastise me because my examples go back a few decades, and then turn around and ring the GOP's bell by citing **** they did back in the mid-1800's..... Nice...

No. You're wrong. Again, unbelievably. You couldn't come up with anything less than 40 years old to support your original point which clearly was that dems are all about the regular people while r's are not. I'm still waiting for something more recent, not ancient history because that is the context here.

My response regarding MLK was only that. A response to your posting of old ****.....an incorrect posting as a matter of fact.

Now....can you back up your statement or not?

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Friggen' Bomma acting like a Republican and giving payoffs to the Wall Street fatcats. What happened to BommaMoney from His stash?

 

[RollRedRoll]

No. You're wrong. Again, unbelievably. You couldn't come up with anything less than 40 years old to support your original point which clearly was that dems are all about the regular people while r's are not. I'm still waiting for something more recent, not ancient history because that is the context here.

My response regarding MLK was only that. A response to your posting of old ****.....an incorrect posting as a matter of fact.

Now....can you back up your statement or not?

A recent example would be the ACA... As flawed as it is, it's at least an attempt, albeit a ****** one, at addressing the problem of so many people not being able to afford to go to the ******* doctor. What's the republican plan... Oh yeah... **** 'em!! That's the republican plan. And as for SS and Medicare being old news, they're still being argued over today between the two sides so I think that makes them still very relevant. You got guys like Paul Ryan that want to pass budgets that lower Medicare payouts and raise retirement ages while, of course, raising ******* defense spending. We already spend more on defense than the next 26 countries behind us on the list combined... 25 of whom are allies and this ******' *** clown wants to increase defense spending while reducing money that helps the average Joe.