Guest
|
I really can't believe this...my major concern (and huge fear) was that we'd elect a president that still believes in the "American dream" of home ownership. And then the recent debates...
I was warming up to (read settling on) Gingrich, and then he starts praising Fannie and Freddie. It's like he was under a rock the last four years and didn't understand what got us into the finacial and debt-overload mess we're in. Fannie and Freddie guarantee the home loans to the banks, so the banks can engage in shady lending and push ownership on individuals that can't afford it to generate fees. The banks have no recourse under this arrangement.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/12/gingrich-freddie-mac/1
Just because Newt can talk inteliigently and write books (hey, isn't that how the Obama got elected?) doesn't mean he has any clue about the economy. I give high praise to Bachman for getting on his case; she's really risen in my eyes. And Mitt should be a lock for the nomination, but people like fancy orators and that's the only reason why Newt is near the top.
Holy geez. People getting upside over Mitt joking about a $10k bet. Ask anyone in the 99% if they wished they had enough money to make a $10k bet. They should think about it -- isn't that what this country needs. To lift all boats, not declare class warfare on the rich and give their money away. Income redistribution is fine, but lack of understanding of what makes the world go around should have been Time's person of the year. Oh wait, it was, the protester -- 99%. I guess Time has it right.
Anyway, I can't believe that the frontrunner now holds an opinion that embraces my biggest concern -- let's just create some other bubble and then our kids will have to suffer the consequences. Unbelievable. I'm not kidding: A GREAT DEPRESSION is not a remote possibility in our lifetimes (it is a meaningfuly one), and putting people in homes they can't afford AGAIN will almost definitely ensure that it will happen. The only reason why we had only a Great Recession is that we were incredibly healthy heading into the housing bubble. Absent some unbelieavable productivity enhancement, it will be a while if we get back into such good shape again.
And don't listen to Obama about the unemployment rate (it's fallen from about 9% to 8.6%). It's only going down because people have stopped looking for work. The most accurate employment number is one that is practically unestimable. It is the UNDERemployment rate (which excludes people doing part time work to make ends meet). And the UNDERemployment rate is currently probably as bad as the the times of the Great Depression.
I hope Newt tumbles just like Cain. And we see a Romney/Paul or Romney/Bachman ticket.
-- Joe M.
|
| Posted: 29 Dec 2011 15:16 Back to top |
Guest
|
Well, Gingrich certainly won South Carolina and now he's got the momentum back. Didn't the house overthrow him when he was speaker? How is he being considered a candidate now? Beyond me.
|
| Posted: 23 Jan 2012 18:07 Back to top |
Guest
|
Gingrich won Georgia. But he's done, I'd say.
Santorum's got a chance. But Romney's probably going to pull out the nomination.
Did I hear somewhere that Sarah Palin might run in 2016?
|
| Posted: 06 Mar 2012 22:50 Back to top |
