It all started a long time ago, but we need to stop the blaming and start the fixing, and spending another trillion dollars that we do not have on health care is not the answer. At this point spending any more money that we do not have is not the answer.
Government needs to stop the spending and start cutting the welfare.
Yet, in the title of your post, you blame Clinton for the baking crisis. But, we need to stop the blaming.
Helping Americans get out from under debt by offering a public option for health care does help but has nothing at all in any way, shape, or form with the banking crisis. They are two completely and separate deals.
For those of you who think a public option for health care is the worst thing ever, think about this: Privatize police and fire. Those that can not afford police or fire just go without. Their house burns down or they are robbed of everything. Yet, those that can afford to pay into the pool for police and fire will get their stuff back and keep their home from burning down. Is that fair?
Also, if a public option, like they have in Canada and Sweden and Denmark, is so bad, why are they so much happier than us in the United States?
Starbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 590 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 1154 times:
Quoting Seb146 (Reply 1): Yet, in the title of your post, you blame Clinton for the baking crisis. But, we need to stop the blaming.
Basically, what I was getting at was that next someone will come out and say Bush 1, then Reagan, etc etc.
When will it end. The government has been spending money it doesn't have for a Long time on things that they really should have nothing to do with. They have completely destroyed Social Security and Medicare, Couldn't run the Mustang Ranch when they had that. They just need to worry about infrastructure and get out of the welfare business.
Max550 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1113 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 1151 times:
Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter):
It all started a long time ago, but we need to stop the blaming and start the fixing, and spending another trillion dollars that we do not have on health care is not the answer. At this point spending any more money that we do not have is not the answer.
Government needs to stop the spending and start cutting the welfare.
What is this thread about? You ask if Clinton is responsible for the banking crisis, then say we should stop blaming people. Then you say that spending a trillion dollars on health care is not the answer for the fixing (of the banking crisis?) You continue by stating that spending more money that we don't have is not the answer (to the banking crisis?) You finish by saying gov't needs to stop the spending and start cutting the welfare, what does that have to do with the banking crisis?
To answer your question, Clinton played a part in causing the banking crisis, but so did many other people and factors. I won't go into who that would be since you're clearly not interested in blaming anyone.
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 11 hours ago) and read 1062 times:
Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter): Government needs to stop the spending and start cutting the welfare.
Before this can happen, while I do agree with you, wages do need to go back up again. For that to happen, I don't think we will see for a very long time.....sadly.
Cutting welfare will help get the lazy asses back to work again....that's a start!
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
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.
...
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
To be fair, the date of the article is Sept. 30, 1999, which, during that part his administration, was under a Republican controlled congress.
So, I'm not entirely blaming Clinton, Bush, Obama, Democrats, Republicans because truth be told, we, as in WE THE PEOPLE, are the responsible ones for voting these stupid looneys in. It seems that one year old toodler from those E-Trade commericals could run the Federal Government better than these morons.
So, the truth, we the people (as in you, me, everyone in this thread, all Americans) are stupid, because we allow the politicans to get away with this garbage.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
Diamond From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3279 posts, RR: 66 Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 10 hours ago) and read 1052 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 7): I'm going to use the New York Times for my source, the NY Freakin Times!
I'm not sure what the point is here.
The title of this thread is ok. And the opening post's first sentence is ok.
Except they are in direct contradiction to each other. That's all I was saying.
If someone wants to blame Bill Clinton for something, they can certainly do that. But they should not then follow it up with a false plea to stop all the blaming.
Max550 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1113 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 10 hours ago) and read 1037 times:
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 7): So, I'm not entirely blaming Clinton, Bush, Obama, Democrats, Republicans
I don't know how Obama gets on the list of people you are blaming. I don't think the most junior member of the Senate would have had that kind of power.
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 7): WE THE PEOPLE, are the responsible ones for voting these stupid looneys in.
But the stupid looneys can't afford to run a campaign without the money they get from the financial sector. We won't really see politicians acting in our interests until we have public financing for elections.
Seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9822 posts, RR: 17 Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 4 hours ago) and read 975 times:
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 6): Cutting welfare will help get the lazy asses back to work again
Quoting Cws818 (Reply 10): It would help if there were ample available jobs for them to work at.
Never mind. CWS beat me to it. I was going to say: cutting people off welfare does not help when they have no jobs as back ups to pay for anything.
Another good point that was brought up is the fact that Congress is where laws and rules start. So, when Republican controlled Congress pass different rules and regulations under a Democratic president, he gets blamed. Likewise, Democrats in control of Congress pass rules and regulations under a Republican president, he gets blamed.
So, to put the blame soley on the back of Clinton or Bush I or Bush II or Reagan is a bit much. How about Tip O'Neill, Newt Gingrich, and so forth as well...
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 1 hour ago) and read 940 times:
Quoting Elite (Reply 13): Probably because the New York Times is a very leftist newspaper...
He aimed that statement at my entire post.
Quoting Diamond (Reply 8): If someone wants to blame Bill Clinton for something, they can certainly do that. But they should not then follow it up with a false plea to stop all the blaming.
Thing is, that was the title of the article linked in the OP. The OP is just as angry as you are in terms of the "blame game" going around. What does it solve? Absolutely nothing.
Quoting Max550 (Reply 9): I don't know how Obama gets on the list of people you are blaming.
My point is the current President will be blamed for issues he most likely had no control over. People will blame the top.
Quoting Max550 (Reply 9): But the stupid looneys can't afford to run a campaign without the money they get from the financial sector. We won't really see politicians acting in our interests until we have public financing for elections.
And therein lies the problem. It seems you need to be rich to run for office.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 590 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2006, 2760 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
