PS I am very objective. I don't care whether the answer to the problems are found within capitalism, stalinism globalism or bananism. I have no preconceived ideas, socialism was a conscious choice after objective investigation, there is was also the possibility that there is was no answer, so be it.
My economic understanding comes from reading Marx. Socialism is the understanding of man and his relationship to his environment and the means of production. So this cannot be my own idea, I would not profess to be so clever. But I have studied it and when put into practice it works, it is correct, thats what's I am interested in. And its no good just saying so, it must be able to be proved by empirical evidence, not ideology which is useless and serves more to confuse than enlighten 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
