• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Economy- New Poll

Do You think the US Economy is Heading into or in a Recession--or a Depression?

  • No-the Economy is doing Fine

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes- a mild short Recession

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes- a prolonged Recession/Depression

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Economic Collapse

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
OOPS sorry guys- I forgot people with an (R) by their name can do no wrong- and the fact they ran the countries direction for the last 8 years in the White House- and 12 of the last 14 years in Congress should not be used against them :roll: :wink: :lol: :lol: :p

Yep- must be George Washingtons fault according to the cult folks... :lol: :wink:

Anyway I like to remind you I TOLD YOU SO- when it became clear what Bush was doing....Now the only question is how bad does it get.... :???:

OT...well you refuse to admit that Clinton had anything to do with the collapse of the mortgage industry...even tho he signed the bill that repelled Glass-Stegall ....so why should Bush take anymore blame for anything once the new Pres is sworn in?? It's his baby then regardless of what happened the previous 8 years. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
 

Texan

Well-known member
Bump

Ooops - this thread fell off the first page again.

How 'bout those markets? Dow down below 8000, new lows in the cattle markets - Spring feeders down to 90 bucks. You hear that giant sucking sound, Oldtimer? All the capital fleeing the markets? Scared of the Obama presidency? Where's all that "HOPE"? :???:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Texan said:
Bump

Ooops - this thread fell off the first page again.

How 'bout those markets? Dow down below 8000, new lows in the cattle markets - Spring feeders down to 90 bucks. You hear that giant sucking sound, Oldtimer? All the capital fleeing the markets? Scared of the Obama presidency? Where's all that "HOPE"? :???:

Guess this is the Change he was talking about! Obama certainly has changed the norm of politics. Seeing how the norm is once the uncertainty of who will be President is solved then the markets rally some. Obama has changed that into the biggest loss ever following the announcement of a new President.

Then you have him and Democrats talking about more bail outs for Auto Industry and investors are getting out!
 

TSR

Well-known member
TexasBred said:
Oldtimer said:
OOPS sorry guys- I forgot people with an (R) by their name can do no wrong- and the fact they ran the countries direction for the last 8 years in the White House- and 12 of the last 14 years in Congress should not be used against them :roll: :wink: :lol: :lol: :p

Yep- must be George Washingtons fault according to the cult folks... :lol: :wink:

Anyway I like to remind you I TOLD YOU SO- when it became clear what Bush was doing....Now the only question is how bad does it get.... :???:

OT...well you refuse to admit that Clinton had anything to do with the collapse of the mortgage industry...even tho he signed the bill that repelled Glass-Stegall ....so why should Bush take anymore blame for anything once the new Pres is sworn in?? It's his baby then regardless of what happened the previous 8 years. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

TBred is that the same bill tht all the Dem's voted against except 1 and all the Rep's voted for???
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
TSR that's how the vote count went....but here's what was happening behind the scenes. :



In the background of the go-go economy, the feeling grew among some economists and the financial community that Glass-Steagall hampered America’s financial competitiveness. Among the many voices favoring this was Alan Greenspan along with former Goldman Sachs partner Robert Rubin, Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary. In a 1995 speech and testimony to Congress Rubin signaled the Clinton Administration was ready to repeal Glass-Steagall:

“The banking industry is fundamentally different from what it was two decades ago, let alone in 1933.” He said the industry has been transformed into a global business of facilitating capital formation through diverse new products, services and markets. “U.S. banks generally engage in a broader range of securities activities abroad than is permitted domestically,” said the Treasury secretary. “Even domestically, the separation of investment banking and commercial banking envisioned by Glass-Steagall has eroded significantly.”


Anyone who thinks the repeal of Glass-Steagall was forced on an unwilling Bill Clinton need only read Rubin’s testimony. A year later Sandy Weill set in motion the forces that would finally end Glass-Steagall.

Weill proposed the most audacious financial merger of in American history: he would merge one of the largest insurance companies (Travelers), one of the largest investment banks (Salomon Smith Barney), and the largest commercial banks (Citibank) in America. The problem was the merger was illegal in terms of Glass-Steagall. Independent Community Bankers of America CEO Kenneth Guenther captured the audacity of the deal in an interview with Frontline:

Here you have the leadership — Sandy Weill of Travelers and John Reed of Citicorp — saying, “Look, the Congress isn’t moving fast enough. Let’s do it on our own. To heck with the Congress. Let us effect this.” And so they move towards effecting it, and they get the blessing of the chairman of the Federal Reserve system in early April, when legislation is pending.

I mean, this is hubris in the worst sense of the word. Who do they think they are? Other people, firms, cannot act like this. … Citicorp and Travelers were so big that they were able to pull this off. They were able to pull off the largest financial conglomeration — the largest financial coming together of banking, insurance, and securities — when legislation was still on the books saying this was illegal. And they pulled this off with the blessings of the president of the United States, President Clinton; the chairman of the Federal Reserve system, Alan Greenspan; and the secretary of the treasury, Robert Rubin.

And then, when it’s all over, what happens? The secretary of the treasury becomes the vice chairman of the emerging Citigroup.

Weill convinced Greenspan, Robert Rubin and Clinton to sign off on a merger that was illegal at the time, with the expectation that Congress would repeal Glass-Steagall. Charles Geisst, a professor of finance at Manhattan College adds in a Frontline Interview:

Part of [Weill's] deal with the Federal Reserve was to get rid of all Glass-Steagall violations in the new Citigroup within two years. Otherwise, he would have been faced with a divestiture of a company which had just been put together, because of an old law which is still on the books. So it clearly behooved him, and many other people in the financial services industry who wanted to accomplish essentially the same sort of thing in the future, to push to get Glass-Steagall repealed.

So they pushed hard?

Pushed very hard. … They pushed so hard that the legislation, HR10, House Resolution 10, which became the Financial Services Modernization Act, was referred to as “the Citi-Travelers Act” on Capitol Hill. ..
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
TSR said:
TexasBred said:
Oldtimer said:
OOPS sorry guys- I forgot people with an (R) by their name can do no wrong- and the fact they ran the countries direction for the last 8 years in the White House- and 12 of the last 14 years in Congress should not be used against them :roll: :wink: :lol: :lol: :p

Yep- must be George Washingtons fault according to the cult folks... :lol: :wink:

Anyway I like to remind you I TOLD YOU SO- when it became clear what Bush was doing....Now the only question is how bad does it get.... :???:

OT...well you refuse to admit that Clinton had anything to do with the collapse of the mortgage industry...even tho he signed the bill that repelled Glass-Stegall ....so why should Bush take anymore blame for anything once the new Pres is sworn in?? It's his baby then regardless of what happened the previous 8 years. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

TBred is that the same bill tht all the Dem's voted against except 1 and all the Rep's voted for???

Once again you lie, I have showed you before, that the final bill that was approved by both the house and the Senate after coming out of committee was passed with bipartisan support. Why do you continue to say the same lie when it is not true!
 

TSR

Well-known member
TexasBred said:
TSR that's how the vote count went....but here's what was happening behind the scenes. :



In the background of the go-go economy, the feeling grew among some economists and the financial community that Glass-Steagall hampered America’s financial competitiveness. Among the many voices favoring this was Alan Greenspan along with former Goldman Sachs partner Robert Rubin, Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary. In a 1995 speech and testimony to Congress Rubin signaled the Clinton Administration was ready to repeal Glass-Steagall:

“The banking industry is fundamentally different from what it was two decades ago, let alone in 1933.” He said the industry has been transformed into a global business of facilitating capital formation through diverse new products, services and markets. “U.S. banks generally engage in a broader range of securities activities abroad than is permitted domestically,” said the Treasury secretary. “Even domestically, the separation of investment banking and commercial banking envisioned by Glass-Steagall has eroded significantly.”


Anyone who thinks the repeal of Glass-Steagall was forced on an unwilling Bill Clinton need only read Rubin’s testimony. A year later Sandy Weill set in motion the forces that would finally end Glass-Steagall.

Weill proposed the most audacious financial merger of in American history: he would merge one of the largest insurance companies (Travelers), one of the largest investment banks (Salomon Smith Barney), and the largest commercial banks (Citibank) in America. The problem was the merger was illegal in terms of Glass-Steagall. Independent Community Bankers of America CEO Kenneth Guenther captured the audacity of the deal in an interview with Frontline:

Here you have the leadership — Sandy Weill of Travelers and John Reed of Citicorp — saying, “Look, the Congress isn’t moving fast enough. Let’s do it on our own. To heck with the Congress. Let us effect this.” And so they move towards effecting it, and they get the blessing of the chairman of the Federal Reserve system in early April, when legislation is pending.

I mean, this is hubris in the worst sense of the word. Who do they think they are? Other people, firms, cannot act like this. … Citicorp and Travelers were so big that they were able to pull this off. They were able to pull off the largest financial conglomeration — the largest financial coming together of banking, insurance, and securities — when legislation was still on the books saying this was illegal. And they pulled this off with the blessings of the president of the United States, President Clinton; the chairman of the Federal Reserve system, Alan Greenspan; and the secretary of the treasury, Robert Rubin.

And then, when it’s all over, what happens? The secretary of the treasury becomes the vice chairman of the emerging Citigroup.

Weill convinced Greenspan, Robert Rubin and Clinton to sign off on a merger that was illegal at the time, with the expectation that Congress would repeal Glass-Steagall. Charles Geisst, a professor of finance at Manhattan College adds in a Frontline Interview:

Part of [Weill's] deal with the Federal Reserve was to get rid of all Glass-Steagall violations in the new Citigroup within two years. Otherwise, he would have been faced with a divestiture of a company which had just been put together, because of an old law which is still on the books. So it clearly behooved him, and many other people in the financial services industry who wanted to accomplish essentially the same sort of thing in the future, to push to get Glass-Steagall repealed.

So they pushed hard?

Pushed very hard. … They pushed so hard that the legislation, HR10, House Resolution 10, which became the Financial Services Modernization Act, was referred to as “the Citi-Travelers Act” on Capitol Hill. ..

Bottomline: Clinton signed a bill that went against his own party's wishes. I can blame Clinton but not the Dem's theyvoted against it almost unamimously.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
TexasBred said:
TSR that's how the vote count went....but here's what was happening behind the scenes. :

TSR is a liar don't agree with him, that is not how the vote count went. The FINAL BILL was passed with bipartisan support after it came out of committee from the House and sent back to the Senate!

TSR is just telling half truths just like OT does all the time.

And now he will not respond because he knows he is wrong, he will run away and in a few weeks he will say the same thing.

He will not admit when he is wrong no matter how many times I show him the final vote count!

Its bad enough he will not say he is wrong, but he just goes on believing the way the Kool Aid servers tell him to believe.

It is easy matter of record to see what the final vote was on the Bill that Clinton signed was.

This is how the liberals use smoke and mirrors to mislead the public!
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
TSR said:
Bottomline: Clinton signed a bill that went against his own party's wishes. I can blame Clinton but not the Dem's theyvoted against it almost unamimously.

LIAR! LIAR!

You know the bill passed with Democratic support once it was revised and re voted on. You quote figures from its previous version not the one Clinton signed and was put into law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Liar!


After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bipartisan bill resolving the differences was passed in the

Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15.

Without forcing a veto vote, this bipartisan, veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999. [10]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

The bill passed Senate 90 to 8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now please acknowledge you were wrong!
 

Mike

Well-known member
Congress’ vote margin on Gramm-Leach-Bliley was not close, with 450 of the members of both chambers voting for it and only 64 voting against. The measure had bipartisan support. And small wonder…Financial sector interests gave more than $86 billion to members of Congress in the three-year run up to the November 1999 vote on the bill. Those members who supported the bill received about $180,000 in cash on average from financial sources over those three years. Those members who opposed the bill received about half that amount on average.

There was little difference in the money collected by Republicans who supported the bill and those who opposed it; the 255 GOP supporters collected an average of $179,175, while the opponents in their ranks-and there were only five of them-collected $171,890. On the Democratic side, however, there was a wide gulf, as the graph indicates. The 195 Democrats who supported the Financial Services Modernization Act had received an average of $179,920 in the two years and 10 months leading up to its passage, while the 59 Democrats who opposed it received just $83,475.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
And TSR will not admit he was wrong, and after we continue to show him the facts he still hangs on to his false facts and worse he keeps trying to mislead others with that false information!
 

hopalong

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
And TSR will not admit he was wrong, and after we continue to show him the facts he still hangs on to his false facts and worse he keeps trying to mislead others with that false information!
Just like oldtimer and fff, skew the truth to read what THEY want it to read and pass it on as the gospel, what is worse they actually believe it>
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Aplus...you've called TSR a liar three times on just this page...did you ever hear about communication doors closing when one starts name calling....???

I wouldn't reply to you either,maybe try a different tactic
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
hopalong said:
aplusmnt said:
And TSR will not admit he was wrong, and after we continue to show him the facts he still hangs on to his false facts and worse he keeps trying to mislead others with that false information!
Just like oldtimer and fff, skew the truth to read what THEY want it to read and pass it on as the gospel, what is worse they actually believe it>

You two admit when you are wrong? Easy to call others out harder to put up and do.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
Aplus...you've called TSR a liar three times on just this page...did you ever hear about communication doors closing when one starts name calling....???

I wouldn't reply to you either,maybe try a different tactic

I call him a liar because three times now on other threads I have showed him were he is wrong. This is not a subject were everyone can have their opinions this is a closed subject with up and down votes on the bill that Clinton signed, it is a matter of congressional record.

I was nice the second time and told him I would give him the benefit that he did not see it the first time. But now for the third time it is apparent that he is just flat out lying!

At a certain point you have to quit giving the benefit and call a spade a spade!

Ps. Feel free to not respond to me any time you wish! :wink:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
hopalong said:
aplusmnt said:
And TSR will not admit he was wrong, and after we continue to show him the facts he still hangs on to his false facts and worse he keeps trying to mislead others with that false information!
Just like oldtimer and fff, skew the truth to read what THEY want it to read and pass it on as the gospel, what is worse they actually believe it>

You two admit when you are wrong? Easy to call others out harder to put up and do.

I have admitted on here when I was wrong! We all can have our opinions but some things are just plain either right or wrong, no debate about it!

But worse than not admitting being wrong is to turn around days later and mislead someone again with the same information that you were showed to be wrong! If nothing else just don't bring it up again and be quiet about it, but TSR keeps spreading the false facts even after being showed more than once he was wrong!
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Aplus wrote:
I have showed him were he is wrong.

Of course you did,thats all you ever do is tell or show people what they are doing wrong.....You seem to know whats best for everybody and to have all the answers.... :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

TSR

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
TSR said:
Bottomline: Clinton signed a bill that went against his own party's wishes. I can blame Clinton but not the Dem's theyvoted against it almost unamimously.

LIAR! LIAR!

You know the bill passed with Democratic support once it was revised and re voted on. You quote figures from its previous version not the one Clinton signed and was put into law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Liar!


After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bipartisan bill resolving the differences was passed in the

Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15.

Without forcing a veto vote, this bipartisan, veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999. [10]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

The bill passed Senate 90 to 8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now please acknowledge you were wrong!

You know you like to throw out that word liar rather easily. I guess that means TBred is a liar to as he agreed with me on the vote. Now for your feeble mind its possible just possible we could be talking about 2 different bills or votes.
 

TSR

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Aplus...you've called TSR a liar three times on just this page...did you ever hear about communication doors closing when one starts name calling....???

I wouldn't reply to you either,maybe try a different tactic

I call him a liar because three times now on other threads I have showed him were he is wrong. This is not a subject were everyone can have their opinions this is a closed subject with up and down votes on the bill that Clinton signed, it is a matter of congressional record.

I was nice the second time and told him I would give him the benefit that he did not see it the first time. But now for the third time it is apparent that he is just flat out lying!

At a certain point you have to quit giving the benefit and call a spade a spade!

Ps. Feel free to not respond to me any time you wish! :wink:

Three times on other threads. roflmao You in your own feeble mind think you have I haven't seen it. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
TSR said:
aplusmnt said:
TSR said:
Bottomline: Clinton signed a bill that went against his own party's wishes. I can blame Clinton but not the Dem's theyvoted against it almost unamimously.

LIAR! LIAR!

You know the bill passed with Democratic support once it was revised and re voted on. You quote figures from its previous version not the one Clinton signed and was put into law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Liar!


After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bipartisan bill resolving the differences was passed in the

Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15.

Without forcing a veto vote, this bipartisan, veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999. [10]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

The bill passed Senate 90 to 8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now please acknowledge you were wrong!

You know you like to throw out that word liar rather easily. I guess that means TBred is a liar to as he agreed with me on the vote. Now for your feeble mind its possible just possible we could be talking about 2 different bills or votes.

NO we are talking about the same bill! And I believe you know it, you are on here to much to have just not looked at threads you have posted on and never came back.

The bill was voted on with the same vote as you said in its original form, then it was passed by the house with changes, then put in committee to work out the changes then sent back to the senate for a vote and passed almost unanimously and then was signed by Clinton. So the bill that was signed by Clinton did have Democratic support in both the senate and house!

And I believe you have seen this now for the fourth time!
 

Latest posts

Top