VT
*I have used my own words all through this thread.

*What is it that you disagree/agree with in my very limited assessment
of Obama?

*It is impossible to present an overall understanding of the causes of
the crisis that are effecting the global economy in just a few lines,
when the growth of the contradictions occur over the span of several
decades. I can only hope to provide snippets to expose tendencies
which are present within the system itself and their likely outcome. I
can certainly recommend numerous pamphlets and articles that explain
these processes in detail.

*Genuine socialism requires the total abolishment of the nation-state
and the profit system with the means of production and the worlds
resources being owned and controlled democratically by all mankind,
not a handful of capitalists that hold the rest of humanity to ransom.
This is the basis on which the failed Russian revolution was fought,
on internationalism "workers of the world unite" I point this out to
demonstrate that genuine socialism can only exists when capitalism no
longer exists. So I am certainly not an advocate of the regimes run
under the brutal fist of Stalin, Mao, Castro and the biggest fraud of
all Chavez, which were/are all counterrevolutionary. I am not
attempting to sway you at all, I am clarifying my position a little. 8
years ago I was a labor voter, much water under the bridge has passed
since then.

Cheers


On Sep 9, 2:47 pm, VT Sean Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank you are assuming things and in doing so you show you
> have no clue who you are talking to.
>
> I was VERY critical of Obama and in fact many of my critizisms
> are being used against Obama now.
>
> Try not to paint me with such a broad brush and LISTEN and READ
> my posts.
>
> Obama is not President and Bin laden IS a proven enemy of the
> 'US.
>
> Your economic BS is only partially correct, which gives you just
> enough
> validity and credibility to persuade the uninformed that you know
> what you are talking about.
>
> You don't have a complete grasp of your ideas because they are
> not your own. Use your brain and you can better argue your
> beliefs.
>
> On Sep 9, 12:29 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > You are making no sense whatsoever. The US has been the world's
> > biggest debtor since the mid 1980's, requiring the influx of $2-3
> > billion dollars a day in international direct investment to keep the
> > economy afloat. The industrial sector has lost millions of jobs
> > because of the dot com bubble bust and the the shipping of
> > manufacturing off shore to Asia. Holden once employed 600,000 in the
> > US it now has 140,000 and counting. The loss of jobs and weakening of
> > the economy doesn't happen overnight, both parties are responsible.
>
> > Are you trying to tell me millions marched against the war before it
> > was launched and the Democrats had no idea that the intelligence was
> > fake. Get real
>
> > You are very outspoken critic of the Bush administration, and with
> > good cause. The Bush administration is nothing more than a criminal
> > cabal of gangster’s thugs and war criminals. However you fail to apply
> > the same standards and objectivity when it comes to the Democrats and
> > Obama.
>
> > Without listing a litany of transgressions, Obama supports the war on
> > terror. The war on terror is central to the Bush administrations
> > waging of preemptive imperialist wars in the Middle East. It is a
> > bogus, opened ended war that can be invoked indefinitely to justify
> > further military aggression by the US without provocation.
>
> > Obama supports the breeching of Pakistani Sovereignty resulting in the
> > deaths of innocent civilians. Obama has supported the funding of the
> > war on the pretense of supporting the troops, when any rational person
> > knows bringing the troops home is the best support that can be
> > bestowed upon them.
>
> > This alone makes Obama complicit in the heinous war crimes committed
> > by the Bush administration, along with most of his reprehensible
> > colleagues.
>
> > Obama promises social reforms when he knows very well he cannot make
> > good these promises. The US is ostensibly bankrupt, surviving on the
> > influx of overseas investment that is rapidly drying up due to the
> > global economic crisis. The Fed cannot continue to bail out failing
> > banking institutions; it does not have infinite resources.
>
> > This scenario is repeated in every industrialized country, as all so-
> > called workers parties due to economic conditions can NO longer grant
> > concessions to the working class and have swung sharply to the right
> > clawing back all the hard won concessions won by workers after WW2,
> > including the Dems. It was Clinton that lead the assault on the US
> > health care system.
>
> > Economics and the demands of capital (big business) drive policy, not
> > the will of the masses. Ideology is just that, an ideal that needs the
> > right environment to be realized. This environment does not exist in
> > the current socio-economic set up.
>
> > On Sep 9, 2:13 pm, VT Sean Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Frank the world BOUGHT the US Debt thinking it was secure.
> > > The Mortgage bonds would have been secured if the economy
> > > was strong, jobs were not being shipped overseas, and the
> > > nation did not have to raise interest rates to get the world
> > > to buy our DEBT, which put a burden on home owners with
> > > ARM's whose rates went up continuously for 13 straight tax hikes!
>
> > > The Democrats supported Bush based on his LIE about the NIE.
>
> > > If the truth about the WMD's were known no one would have
> > > given Bush the green light to challenge Saddam about the WMD's.
>
> > > Republicans in Congress BLOCKED all challenges to the Bush
> > > war so in effect THEY as well as the Bush White House are
> > > responsible.
>
> > > On Sep 8, 6:11 pm, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > The financial crisis in the US cannot be laid at the feet of the
> > > > Republicans. The decision to go to war, a big drain on the US, was
> > > > backed by the Democrats as well, while the melt down of the financial
> > > > sector is a worldwide phenomenon, of which the sub-prime loans are but
> > > > an extreme expression
>
> > > > All the major industrialized nations are in the same position: record
> > > > government and personnel debt, job losses, the slashing of wages and
> > > > conditions and the destruction of the manufacturing sector that has
> > > > moved offshore in search of cheap labor.
>
> > > > The build up of debt commenced in the 80’s, by the 2003 the US made
> > > > the decision to go to war to secure the resources of the Middle East
> > > > to offset the financial slide. The Bush administration is responsible
> > > > for heinous crimes against humanity, but they are not responsible for
> > > > a systematic global financial meltdown (although they are doing
> > > > nothing to help those most in need).
>
> > > > On Sep 9, 7:29 am, VT Sean Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Republicans and McCain if things are going so well,
> > > > > why the $5 Trillion Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae Bailout?
>
> > > > > The tax cuts should have gone to the middle class,
> > > > > not the richest Americans. It is very clear that trickle down
> > > > > did not work.
>
> > > > > It is very clear it is the American middle class who need the
> > > > > help.
>
> > > > > It is very clear that after 6 years of the Bush Tax cuts the
> > > > > 11 Million jobs and the prosperity Bush Promised these tax
> > > > > cuts would bring never happened.
>
> > > > > The bottom line is that the Americans who will have to PAY
> > > > > for this bailout will be the MIDDLE CLASS, because the
> > > > > Republicans want to make the Tax Cuts to the Rich Permanent.
>
> > > > > Is this the change McCain talks about, because he supports
> > > > > the Bush Tax cuts.
>
> > > > > Fannie, Freddie deal helps some borrowers, not all By J.W.
> > > > > ELPHINSTONE, AP Business Writer
> > > > > Mon Sep 8, 1:27 PM ET
>
> > > > > The government's historic bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on
> > > > > Sunday will be good news to homebuyers and some homeowners hoping to
> > > > > refinance if it leads to lower mortgage rates, as experts expect.
>
> > > > > But for homeowners already behind on their mortgage payments, or who
> > > > > owe more than their homes are now worth, the plan unveiled Sunday by
> > > > > Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson offers little in the way of extra
> > > > > relief.
>
> > > > > "The bailout will give the mortgage industry a stability that we
> > > > > haven't had in a couple of years," said Rich Cosner, president of
> > > > > Prudential California Realty. "But frankly no, it won't help
> > > > > (struggling borrowers) to refinance."
>
> > > > > Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play a critical and increasingly dominant
> > > > > role in the mortgage market. The companies buy mortgage loans from
> > > > > banks and package those loans into securities that they either hold or
> > > > > sell to U.S. and foreign investors. That allows traditional lenders
> > > > > like Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Washington Mutual to make more
> > > > > loans.
>
> > > > > Together, Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee about $5 trillion in
> > > > > home loans, about half the nation's total. But an alarming number of
> > > > > those loans started going into default, draining the companies'
> > > > > financial reserves and sending a chill through credit markets
> > > > > worldwide. As investors grew more skittish, borrowing costs started
> > > > > rising.
>
> > > > > By placing Fannie and Freddie into a conservatorship, the government
> > > > > is promising investors that the companies' debt is as safe as the
> > > > > Treasury Department's.
>
> > > > > While not a cure-all, the bailout is still a step in the right
> > > > > direction, industry observers say. It will at least "keep the lanes in
> > > > > the mortgage freeway open," said Greg McBride, a senior financial
> > > > > analyst at Bankrate.com, possibly putting the market on the road to
> > > > > recovery.
>
> > > > > If mortgage rates fall, that will attract more potential buyers into
> > > > > the market, which, in turn, will help to prop up home prices, he said.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to