want some Gov't money? apply now!
what does this say? well that "bailout" plan that was approved a few months back? yeah... the guvment is not using it as intended. instead of the guvment buying up the bad loans to help out the banks, it's buying stocks in those banks. maybe someone that knows economics better than me can explain "WTF", but this does NOT sound good.
Desert Tuners
“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”
And you all didn't see this coming miles away?
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
But the democrats in control know how o use our money better than we do. Typical politaical BS that always seems to happen when the government takes over something. Just wait and see if they get a hold of health care, already have something like a 30% fraud rate with medicare.
[quote=Keeper Of The Light™ (Strazca)]And you all didn't see this coming miles away?
yeah, seriously. thats the first thing i thought of when i read about the bailout. the govt buying up companies and corporations is just blatantly bad news, people.
if the govt should take over anything its the federal reserve. then at least we wouldnt need to pay interest on our own money.
ToBoGgAn wrote:color
We aren't allowed to say that word anymore
mitdr774 wrote:But the democrats in control know how o use our money better than we do. Typical politaical BS that always seems to happen when the government takes over something. Just wait and see if they get a hold of health care, already have something like a 30% fraud rate with medicare.
If you pay attention, you will realize that this has NOTHING to do with the Democrats in particular. Bush asked for this bailout, and Henry Paulson made the call on how to spend it.
fark.com wrote:Paulson: The Empire will not purchase toxic assets. Jar Jar Banks: That was never a condition of our agreement. Paulson: I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.
Fark.com headlines really are the best.
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in
America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along,
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and
denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the
same in any country. - Hermann Goring
if you pay attention you wold notice that the democrats had majority control and could have written the plan to prevent such a thing.
mitdr774 wrote:if you pay attention you wold notice that the democrats had majority control and could have written the plan to prevent such a thing.
The Democrats do not however have a filibuster-proof majority nor a veto proof majority.
I'll agree they have no spine to do what they think is right instead of just giving Bush what he wanted but with a couple small provisions to make it look like they where in charge or whatever. In any case they did need to make it passable. Also consider that Wall Street owns Washington DC(both sides of the aisle) so big surprise that nothing revolutionary came out of there. This failure is NOT a Democrat vs Republican thing.
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in
America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along,
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and
denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the
same in any country. - Hermann Goring
Bastardking3000 wrote:mitdr774 wrote:if you pay attention you wold notice that the democrats had majority control and could have written the plan to prevent such a thing.
The Democrats do not however have a filibuster-proof majority nor a veto proof majority.
I'll agree they have no spine to do what they think is right instead of just giving Bush what he wanted but with a couple small provisions to make it look like they where in charge or whatever. In any case they did need to make it passable. Also consider that Wall Street owns Washington DC(both sides of the aisle) so big surprise that nothing revolutionary came out of there. This failure is NOT a Democrat vs Republican thing.
I would also concede that if the Democrats had anything resembling a memory/brains, they would know better than to trust anything Bush says or to give him what he asks for. In any case it is a bit silly to blame Democrats for what Bush's Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson is doing other than the point I just made. Yep - the Government is gonna be partial owner in alot of big banks - and I thought it was supposed to be the Democrats who "experiment with socialism," want big government, etc, etc... LOL.
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in
America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along,
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and
denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the
same in any country. - Hermann Goring
