Reply With Quote
Honestly, I don't think enough people are paying attention. If the majority of the American people really, truly opposed the bailout, both candidates would fall in line and oppose it as well in order to get votes.
he would win the election hands down if he would just oppose this bill.
Honestly, I don't think enough people are paying attention. If the majority of the American people really, truly opposed the bailout, both candidates would fall in line and oppose it as well in order to get votes.
Most Americans don't favor it because they see the $1,200 they got versus the $700B that greedy corporations are set to get....with taxpayer backing.
It's an issue of fairness.
But, what the typical American doesn't see is the impact to them if the deal doesn't get done. No more 0% credit cards, low-interest loans for household items (furniture, etc.), $99 car payments, and so on and so forth. With no one willing to lend, no one is able to buy....and the cycle repeats itself.
If either candidate rebuked the bailout plan to win the election in the short-term it would come back to haunt them in the long-term.
But, what the typical American doesn't see is the impact to them if the deal doesn't get done. No more 0% credit cards, low-interest loans for household items (furniture, etc.), $99 car payments, and so on and so forth. With no one willing to lend, no one is able to buy....and the cycle repeats itself.
we don't need that anyway.
oh and enough people do care....................hundreds of thousands of emails and phone calls have flooded washington.....they know exactly how the people stand.
Eh..it's debatable. We probably don't need it, and there are certainly some who shouldn't be offered it.
But, I'm guilty of buying furniture with money I didn't have in my bank account and going with a 0% loan for like 24 months. I have a steady job and could afford to fit the $100 or so that it would take to pay it off in time in my budget.
Did I need the furniture? Maybe not...but by doing so I injected money (even if it wasn't all at once) into the economy that I otherwise wouldn't have been able to give without that 0% loan.
No way is this anything but a socialist for the rich nation. $25 billion in loans to Detroit just got approved. all of them. It's not our fault they can't make an efficient car. What a slap in the face after we just blew $700+ million for more greedy s who gambled and lost.
Because Obama is backed by people like...oh say, Warren(tax the Super Rich) Buffet/Goldman Sachs, that are going to be the first in line with their hands out to partake of that 700 million. He's also backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Top contributors to Obama's campaign:
Goldman Sachs $691,930
As in Goldman Sachs that just got it's status changed to holding bank and bought into by Berkshire Hathaway, who just so happen to have both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet on their board. Two guys who just so happen to own a 37 billion dollar global charity monopoly...with not a dime of it going to any taxes.
University of California $611,207
Citigroup Inc $448,599
JPMorgan Chase & Co $442,919
Harvard University $435,769
Google Inc $420,174
UBS AG $404,750
National Amusements Inc $389,140
Microsoft Corp $377,235
Lehman Brothers $370,524
Sidley Austin LLP $350,302
Moveon.org $347,463
Skadden, Arps et al $340,264
Time Warner $338,527<<<<That's CNN by the way.
Wilmerhale Llp $335,398
Morgan Stanley $318,070
Latham & Watkins $297,400
Jones Day $289,476
University of Chicago $278,885
Stanford University $276,038
See any names in the news lately on that list?
What about global monopolies?
What about milti billionaires transferring billions of dollars into charities without paying a dime in taxes?
More:
All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office State Party Grand Total Total from
PACs Total from
Individuals
Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 $48,500 $116,900
Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 $6,000 $120,349
Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 $2,000 $109,000
You know...I was thinking about how stupid it was for the US to transfer control of the internet to the UN a few years ago...
Basically the dots are free for anyone to connect...I see a bunch of filthy rich people trying to influence a bunch of extremely poor people, otherwise known as socialism, and I think the end result they have in mind is a global government. With a select few elites in charge of the whole shebang.
There is going to be a lot of money flowing out of this country...and going, where? I say the UN.
Not really a bad thing in and of itself...except for the fact that the only way Socialism can survive is for everything else to be eliminated...an end to class separation can't be that bad...
But I don't know about you guys...but I don't trust anything Bill Gates is involved in...he has...methods that I don't consider particularly admirable.
And what does Obama get out of this? Well he gets to be the first African American President...and I see scant evidence that he cares about anything else other than that....and saying what he needs to to get it.
To say he is an empty suit is understatement...he's an empty suit that is a lawyer, that's the emptiest of all suits..please feel free to think about your own experiences with lawyers.
As for guys like Bill Gates and Buffet...being President of the US would be slumming for them.
Maybe it's all just some lame conspiracy on my part...I just know the media is completely corrupt...and I know the entire internet was overwriten two days after Palin was nominated for VP.
Seriously...you guys thougth that the Neocons and the Cheney Haliburton connection were worrisome?
Get ing serious...a Windows world is what is worrisome. You think about it for a second.
Well then we're definitely ed on security.
The financial industry is the biggest contributor to both parties, which is why Whott leaves out financial industry contribs to Repugs.
The result of the contribs is known as "political capture" along with its ugly twin "regulatory capture".
"I see scant evidence that he cares about anything else other than that"
Of course you can't, with your eyes being full of .
otoh, McMeFirst is on record, both in his book and on audio recordings, aka "hard evidence", as saying the primary reason he wants to be President is pure personal ambition, not to implement his "vision thang" for America, not for patriotic reasons, not America at all, but just for John McMeFirst.
They are BOTH going to vote for it.
Either way, people need to wake the up and quit relying on credit.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
