OT: US Pres election

[PashaDawg]

Obama for me, baby! Obama!

The Bush Administration has driven the Federal Govt. and the USA into a fetid cesspool of sludge that trickled down from their neocon policies (e.g., trashed the Federal budget, ruined the USA's relations with its allies, snoozed at the helm of regulatory agencies (or simply gutted them), gave tax and other breaks to their business cronies, grabbed unconstitutional powers in the name of fighting terrorism, lied to the people to start a war over oil, etc.), and it's hard to believe that McCain would not bring more of the same. But, alas, I am not one of those middle-ground "independent" voters. (Actually, I think it would be good to tweak the electoral system to break up the duopoly of the 2 major parties.)

I remember when folks mused that there was little difference between Bush and Gore. Some voted for Nader, which helped Bush win. I dare say that the USA would have been in much different (better) circumstances if we were coming to end of an 8-year Gore Administration. There is such a thing as good government (e.g. FDR Admin.), and I think history will eventually show that the Bush Administration has been one of the worst.

Thus ends my rant. Whew!

Pasha

[Rytek]

I think McCains choice to research up the conjuration tree and summoning Palin put him back in the game. His lack of paths is hurting him though and he will regret his choice of going thaughtmaturgy instead of construction. Obama is putting his sacreds to good use and is skillfully using his lead in Enchantment to race to the end game. If he is able to pull off an Arcane Nexus the gem income will be too much for McCain, even with a fully equipped Palin running around...

[PashaDawg]

Originally Posted by Rytek

I think McCains choice to research up the conjuration tree and summoning Palin put him back in the game. His lack of paths is hurting him though and he will regret his choice of going thaughtmaturgy instead of construction. Obama is putting his sacreds to good use and is skillfully using his lead in Enchantment to race to the end game. If he is able to pull off an Arcane Nexus the gem income will be too much for McCain, even with a fully equipped Palin running around...

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by Rytek

I think McCains choice to research up the conjuration tree and summoning Palin put him back in the game. His lack of paths is hurting him though and he will regret his choice of going thaughtmaturgy instead of construction. Obama is putting his sacreds to good use and is skillfully using his lead in Enchantment to race to the end game. If he is able to pull off an Arcane Nexus the gem income will be too much for McCain, even with a fully equipped Palin running around...

Remember that Palin's Awe simply doesn't do much against the sort of troops that Obama is producing. And she doesn't mesh much with the mostly undead strategy that McCain has inherited. But, he should have Tartarians soon, so Obama's neglect of his priests (even if they are heretics) could hurt him badly.

[AdmiralZhao]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Remember that Palin's Awe simply doesn't do much against the sort of troops that Obama is producing. And she doesn't mesh much with the mostly undead strategy that McCain has inherited. But, he should have Tartarians soon, so Obama's neglect of his priests (even if they are heretics) could hurt him badly.

Ha, Dominions has been the only way that I've been able to understand the US's position on global warming. I think it is like casting Burden of Time when you have young mages and a good gem income; it hurts you, but it hurts you relatively less than it does other nations who are relying on older mages and high gold-provinces.

Oh, and I'm voting for Nader again. You fools go ahead and throw your votes away on Obama.

[Bwaha]

Well, I won't say whom I will vote for. I feel it is a private matter and no business of others. I will say that the liberal people that I'm associated with feel its okay to hate people that differ from what they consider PC... Yes I live on the left coast and its full of haters. I agree that you should do as much research as possible and make a vote for your children and their children. Don't be filled with anger or fear. Use your brains, not your feelings. In closing I say vote all the bums out, they are all corrupt. all corrupt thru and thru. How else did they get the money and the machine to get elected. Sorry about my rant but the abject theft of money, property, and liberty is quite visible from my perspective. I live in a land that is going the way of the Weimar Republic. I fear that our people have been told its okay to hate and fear people that don't view the world the way they do. Be rational and hold on to the truth.

[Trumanator]

^very nice

I find it intriguing how people can revile Bush as an idiot and yet at the same time believe that he had the guile to bamboozle 3/4 of the fairly even Congress. As for deregulation leading to the current financial crisis, thats actually backwards. So much pressure and regulations were brought to bear on lenders to provide loans to people who were not going to be able to pay them that the mortage meltdown was almost guarenteed. As for an 8 year Gore admin... I wouldn't be surprised if we had gone through half a dozen attacks. Unless 9/11 was a conspiracy too...

[PashaDawg]

Originally Posted by Trumanator

^very nice

I find it intriguing how people can revile Bush as an idiot and yet at the same time believe that he had the guile to bamboozle 3/4 of the fairly even Congress. As for deregulation leading to the current financial crisis, thats actually backwards. So much pressure and regulations were brought to bear on lenders to provide loans to people who were not going to be able to pay them that the mortage meltdown was almost guarenteed. As for an 8 year Gore admin... I wouldn't be surprised if we had gone through half a dozen attacks. Unless 9/11 was a conspiracy too...

Sounds like you're a dedicated member of the Republican Party. I didn't accuse Bush as being an idiot. I actually think he and his administration are smart people who knew exactly what they wanted.

With all due respect, it sounds like you misapprehend the whole dynamic of mortgage backed securities. In the late 1990's and through 2006 (maybe even 2007), there was a dramatic shift in lending practices once the whole mortgage-backed securities concept was developed. The entities that were initiating the mortgage loans did not intend to keep the loans. They were to be sold to Wall Street, and then sold to more investors. So, the initial lenders had little worry about whether the borrower could afford the loan or was trustworthy. (Compare this to the more traditional arrangement of a bank lending money to a home buyer and retaining a mortgage for the life of the loan.)

As these loans became more and more profitable (because there was *a lot* of money to be made), there was increased pressure from the free market to find more borrowers. After the sources of responsible, reliable borrowers were tapped out, the mortgage industry needed to lower their standards for qualifying borrowers for loans (e.g., shifting from documentary proof of income to no such requirement). Again, there was no concern for the loan originator, because they planned to sell the loan to Wall Street. They just wanted to collect their initial financing fees, which were substantial.

To keep the customers coming, the industry devised inventive types of loans to get less loan-worthy borrowers into higher priced homes (e.g., adjustable rate mortgages and interest-only mortgages) that eventually trapped borrowers who bought homes that they probably should never have purchased. For example, the adjustable rate mortgage would have a 2-year teaser rate that was more affordable, and when the rate eventually adjusted after 2 years, the monthly payments would jump up substantially. (I think it is a two way problem. The home borrower was not paying attention to what he/she could afford, and the loan originator was pushing to lend as much as possible (to get higher fees) while disregarding the likely ability of the borrower to repay.)

In the end, we're now facing a crisis of millions of defaulted loans that are the basis of huge Wall Street investments. The problem was exacerbated by the runaway housing market and the difficulty in fully understanding and keeping tabs on the investments, because numerous parties would have fractional shares in the bundled up mortgage backed securities. Again, the pressure was from the free market. It was *not* from any regulators forcing Wall Street investment banks into buying mortgage loans.

Thus ends my second rant.

Pasha

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by PashaDawg

As these loans became more and more profitable (because there was *a lot* of money to be made), there was increased pressure from the free market to find more borrowers. After the sources of responsible, reliable borrowers were tapped out, the mortgage industry needed to lower their standards for qualifying borrowers for loans (e.g., shifting from documentary proof of income to no such requirement). Again, there was no concern for the loan originator, because they planned to sell the loan to Wall Street. They just wanted to collect their initial financing fees, which were substantial.

To keep the customers coming, the industry devised inventive types of loans to get less loan-worthy borrowers into higher priced homes (e.g., adjustable rate mortgages and interest-only mortgages) that eventually trapped borrowers who bought homes that they probably should never have purchased. For example, the adjustable rate mortgage would have a 2-year teaser rate that was more affordable, and when the rate eventually adjusted after 2 years, the monthly payments would jump up substantially. (I think it is a two way problem. The home borrower was not paying attention to what he/she could afford, and the loan originator was pushing to lend as much as possible (to get higher fees) while disregarding the likely ability of the borrower to repay.)

I actually purchased a home based on "stated income". Both my brother and I were doing a lot of work as a private business, without documentation to prove that income. We jumped into the middle of the housing'mortgage boom with no problems, and great expectations.

2 years later, things were looking alright, and we wanted to consolidate outside debts into the mortgage, and at the same time refinance at a lower rate. We got duped into an ARM after a lot of talk that was getting us nowhere, and we were assured that our rate would likely go down slightly in 2 more years, or if it went up, that it couldn't go up enough to really matter.

2 years later, the ARM matured, and we saw a significant increase in mortgage payment. 6 months later, and they bumped it again. Total increase to our mortgage? 30%. I'm sorry, we were not irresponsible, nor were we unable to pay the mortgage that we signed. However, we were not able to pay a mortgage 30% larger than we signed - especially not as my health declined, and budgets tightened.

This was purely predatory economic behavior, and is indicative of the focal problem with free market capitalism. Those who have the money and power are largely incentivized to do -anything- in their power to maximize profits. The profit is all that matters at the end of their day, because it is a measure of the growth of their personal power.


If you don't believe that the current administration has been all about the pursuit of wealth and power, then I can only encourage to look more closely at the issues. To stop, and actually do some hunting around on the internet to see what is currently going on, and who is scratching whose back. You may find yourself extremely surprised. Oh and for the record, Bush is an absolute moron, who is likely becoming senile. He didn't dupe anyone, he very poorly and clumsily repeated lies that were fed to him by much more intelligent and cunning players in the game - he was just a puppet, or a muppet, if you will.

[Trumanator]

Not to mention Obama's high position lamashta