- This topic has 15 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 1 month ago by
SD Transplant.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 31, 2008 at 6:25 PM #14337November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296103
cr
ParticipantBecause it means that people would actually have to be held responsible for their own actions – can you imagine?
You mean I have to pay all this money back?
I’ve asked the same question. Anyone who says this clearly and completely misunderstands the problem.
November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296444ParticipantBecause it means that people would actually have to be held responsible for their own actions – can you imagine?
You mean I have to pay all this money back?
I’ve asked the same question. Anyone who says this clearly and completely misunderstands the problem.
November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296463ParticipantBecause it means that people would actually have to be held responsible for their own actions – can you imagine?
You mean I have to pay all this money back?
I’ve asked the same question. Anyone who says this clearly and completely misunderstands the problem.
November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296475ParticipantBecause it means that people would actually have to be held responsible for their own actions – can you imagine?
You mean I have to pay all this money back?
I’ve asked the same question. Anyone who says this clearly and completely misunderstands the problem.
November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296517ParticipantBecause it means that people would actually have to be held responsible for their own actions – can you imagine?
You mean I have to pay all this money back?
I’ve asked the same question. Anyone who says this clearly and completely misunderstands the problem.
November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296108peterb
ParticipantOur country has 65% of the population in home ownership. That’s called a “majority”. Both politicians and MSM talking-heads know the golden rule is to NEVER tell the majority something it does not want to hear.
That’s why the odds of getting a real “fair and balanced” analysis of anything nowadays requires researching not only on your own, but also outside of MSM.November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296449ParticipantOur country has 65% of the population in home ownership. That’s called a “majority”. Both politicians and MSM talking-heads know the golden rule is to NEVER tell the majority something it does not want to hear.
That’s why the odds of getting a real “fair and balanced” analysis of anything nowadays requires researching not only on your own, but also outside of MSM.November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296468ParticipantOur country has 65% of the population in home ownership. That’s called a “majority”. Both politicians and MSM talking-heads know the golden rule is to NEVER tell the majority something it does not want to hear.
That’s why the odds of getting a real “fair and balanced” analysis of anything nowadays requires researching not only on your own, but also outside of MSM.November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296480ParticipantOur country has 65% of the population in home ownership. That’s called a “majority”. Both politicians and MSM talking-heads know the golden rule is to NEVER tell the majority something it does not want to hear.
That’s why the odds of getting a real “fair and balanced” analysis of anything nowadays requires researching not only on your own, but also outside of MSM.November 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #296522ParticipantOur country has 65% of the population in home ownership. That’s called a “majority”. Both politicians and MSM talking-heads know the golden rule is to NEVER tell the majority something it does not want to hear.
That’s why the odds of getting a real “fair and balanced” analysis of anything nowadays requires researching not only on your own, but also outside of MSM.November 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM #296118SD Transplant
ParticipantA drastic and realistic free market approach with respect to house prices reverting to year 2000-2002, in nominal terms, ought to be a no brainer (back to fundamentals). Now, that should be fine based on the free market concept (the capitalist side of the equation and market cycles). However, the state and political budgets ought to revert to 2000-2002 levels based on the same, free market concept (the other capitalist side of the equation – which is stalled by the politicians who are yelling “capitalism” but act as true socialists).
No matter what approach, the economic equiation has to balance. The real question is do we prop the numbers up let them come down.
It’s hard to deal with why McCain/GOP/Republicans are pushing this direction. They would have more credibility if they would revert back to what they stood for back in the days.
Ahrrrrr…..
November 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM #296459ParticipantA drastic and realistic free market approach with respect to house prices reverting to year 2000-2002, in nominal terms, ought to be a no brainer (back to fundamentals). Now, that should be fine based on the free market concept (the capitalist side of the equation and market cycles). However, the state and political budgets ought to revert to 2000-2002 levels based on the same, free market concept (the other capitalist side of the equation – which is stalled by the politicians who are yelling “capitalism” but act as true socialists).
No matter what approach, the economic equiation has to balance. The real question is do we prop the numbers up let them come down.
It’s hard to deal with why McCain/GOP/Republicans are pushing this direction. They would have more credibility if they would revert back to what they stood for back in the days.
Ahrrrrr…..
November 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM #296478ParticipantA drastic and realistic free market approach with respect to house prices reverting to year 2000-2002, in nominal terms, ought to be a no brainer (back to fundamentals). Now, that should be fine based on the free market concept (the capitalist side of the equation and market cycles). However, the state and political budgets ought to revert to 2000-2002 levels based on the same, free market concept (the other capitalist side of the equation – which is stalled by the politicians who are yelling “capitalism” but act as true socialists).
No matter what approach, the economic equiation has to balance. The real question is do we prop the numbers up let them come down.
It’s hard to deal with why McCain/GOP/Republicans are pushing this direction. They would have more credibility if they would revert back to what they stood for back in the days.
Ahrrrrr…..
November 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM #296490ParticipantA drastic and realistic free market approach with respect to house prices reverting to year 2000-2002, in nominal terms, ought to be a no brainer (back to fundamentals). Now, that should be fine based on the free market concept (the capitalist side of the equation and market cycles). However, the state and political budgets ought to revert to 2000-2002 levels based on the same, free market concept (the other capitalist side of the equation – which is stalled by the politicians who are yelling “capitalism” but act as true socialists).
No matter what approach, the economic equiation has to balance. The real question is do we prop the numbers up let them come down.
It’s hard to deal with why McCain/GOP/Republicans are pushing this direction. They would have more credibility if they would revert back to what they stood for back in the days.
Ahrrrrr…..
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.