Lol government cant control its own spending much less anyhtign else. and military cutbacks imho got us into some ducumentable trouble. but hell teh  bailout frankie, imho you are right. it wont help. those who f%$k it up, bneed to pay. form thepresident on down through congress, to the local civilian

frankie i read it, but alas, i cannot say i agree with most of it. but some , yes i do  , BUT let me ask you this, if you think canada is so good, why do you want to leave. ( H me id like to be in canada, lol)but i cannot make it happen lmao

we were screwed no matter how they handled this "bailout". this may be the lesser of two evils. from talking with my father at length last night about this i'm of the impression that the only "real" pains (immediately) that the average consumer will feel are the hardships of getting loans. it will be very, very, very hard. my dad also told me that there is supposed to be a "time limit" so to speak for the govt to be able to get their money back and if they can't, then they go after the banks. he also told me that because the government is stepping in to do this, now they "own" the banks and can regulate them better and fix this crap so it can't happen again. i didn't ask him for his source but, my dad has never given me false/bad advice before. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUEQz5dltmI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTp_atr2G9E

That is scary stuff!! Watch this one......


http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=sxKpdxiXKgY&feature=related

 

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4TEbIPOHNBQ&feature=related

i'm just curious, are any of these rants by this "preacher" justifiable? can they be proven FACT and not just some crazy preachers rants just to get some limelight? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q86O7qh44I0

No, we dont need a bail out, and we dont need regulation.
We need to publish that there is no regulation, none what so ever and if they give their money to someone, tommorow the receiver can run off with it ...
The FDIC and this or that ... should be replaced by a system where the FDIC does nothing more than hand out all known addresses of the person/persons that made off with your $$$ along with a handout that is titled 'So you lost all your money, aren't you stupid' ...
Prove you lost your $$ by giving it to someone and essentially ... that some one's home address is given to you ...
What is wrong ... really really really wrong is ... deregulate when they're making out like bandits and regulate when they start losing ... Get this, CEO of wamu made 19 million. That bank failed 3 weeks after he started the job ... easy money ... 19 mill 3 weeks.
In case some bank/company is bailed out with public $$$ ... I'd go back to the first time they said deregulate ... and arrest everyone from that point on, make them work in prison ... doing labor, or working as a school teacher or painting bridges or some serious job they are qualified for ... being answerable to someone 100% of the time, and confiscate all their $$$ made from the firm ... like he made 120 million in 10 years, but before that he had 50 million ... he needs to return the 120 million ... if he had 50 from before acquired by non bailout means, he can move that to his wife and kids etc etc ...
It is nowadays fashionable to make huge profits on paper for a few years ... cos your pay  depends on immediate profits, and concentrate all your losses into 1 tight 6 month/1 year window and repeat your tricks again ... need serious oversight ... or need serious ass kicking by people you have ripped off ... back to the no FDIC business.
Cool.
Buddha.

me thinks to prevent "regulations" allowing this to happen, from happening again, impose term limits on elected officials., cause people inpower can be bought. from those in the financial, oil gun whomever else., would be harder to buy a green senator. methinks, and make penalties for shady shaZam!, much harsher. to EVERYONE involved

Do i think Obama can fix this mess. absolutely not. Do i think Mccain can fix this mess? again, absolutely not, but either one, can get a good start on it. the fix should have started 10+ years ago, but alas, it did not 

Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on October 04, 2008, 02:06:26 AM
frankie i read it, but alas, i cannot say i agree with most of it. but some , yes i do  , BUT let me ask you this, if you think canada is so good, why do you want to leave. ( H me id like to be in canada, lol)but i cannot make it happen lmao

about once a week someone brings that up.  American just cannot take criticism without blasting back.  all i have to say is 20yrs 6 months and 22 days.....so what have u done lately?  seriously though i am just making comparisons. there are things in Canada that compared to the US just suck...it goes both ways.

Whoa chill beavis, i aint bringin shaZam! up. WTF have i done?. man chill thef%$k out. i take care of my terminally ill mother, i work full time, and deal with my own issues  both countries have their own problems, hell all countries have their issues. not one is perfect aka a "utopia" sorry man, iddnt mean to blast at you. but hell been hurting in chest for several days. and dealing wiht crap from pretty much every direction. did not mean at all to fire at you directly

Sounds like the crazy rantings of a wack-o preacher to me.  He seems to take a very very little bit of truth (if any at all) and then add alot of BS to it, then spit it out in only a way that a preacher can.  Preachers may be the only people who can get everyone to believe absolute nonsense, but then again, I guess its kind-of their thing.  The end result is still 95% BS no matter how many times he says the same things, no matter how many big names he spouts, no matter how loud he is. 

Quote from: Cal76 on October 03, 2008, 08:46:01 PM
<snip>
I am positive that in a world of 6,706,993,152 people that every religious sect has some racist extremeists, but in my life I have meet far far more that are of a "christian" faith than any other.  It is very well possible that this is because I have always lived in perdominately christian areas, but that does not change the fact that there are some wack-o christians. 
<snip>

There is some similarities and some difference I should post here. The religious wacko's are hardly christians, I am going to say definetly muslims, maybe zorashtrianism, maybe jewism, definetly parsi, and maybe some sects of hinduism. Like mine ... shame on me ... OK.

Here is the interesting item to note. In the theory of how people moved out from africa and one group went to SE asia and then australia almost immediately in like 1-2 generations, but another group went to western asia, eastern europe lived there for 5000 years and then spread both east and west, went to siberia and on to alaska and America, as well as to western europe and to northern India. Most of the religious zealots are from that group. That group populated the whole of what is now western europe, russia, middle east, and northern India. In that group, I almost want to say religion was invented. Islam, christianity, jewism, hinduism are definetly in that group. Once it went to India, in an unreligious population that had arrived there 5000 years ago, this group spread hinduism. Same with islam in the middle east, and jewism ... which later split into christianity.
I'd just say that the rewards of converting people into your religion were obvious in these religions where they encountered populations without any religion. Nice way of putting 'convert into our religion or we kill you'.
Cool.
Buddha.

well, for everyone, its "fashionable to bash on christians" when christians, ( and others will give you the shirt off tehir back. ( those living within the teachings of tehir holy book, and not adding to it anyway

I dont think so ... I think those that talk ... only talk ... you need to behave the way your holy book asks you to, not just be constantly yakking about that book.
I think most of the very "religion spewing" clowns of any religion are essentially using gods name to rob you blind.
Cool.
Buddha.
Like I call myself the buddha but will beat the crap out of the next clown who asks a stupid question about carbs ... that way ... 

Quote from: The Buddha on October 06, 2008, 11:57:01 AM
I dont think so ... I think those that talk ... only talk ... you need to behave the way your holy book asks you to, not just be constantly yakking about that book.
I think most of the very "religion spewing" clowns of any religion are essentially using gods name to rob you blind.
Cool.
Buddha.
Like I call myself the buddha but will beat the crap out of the next clown who asks a stupid question about carbs ... that way ... 

agreed. read ones hol;y book. aka teh torah, the qu'ran, or the bible, and read it as it is. not interpreted to how it would suit you.

yami no harm no fowl i was not pissed when i typed that at all we are still kewl

QuoteLet's say that all the crazy, mean ole', black church that QT describes is true.(not that I for one minute believe this rubbish, I will not listen to a few seconds of one single sermon and pretend that I know the entire church's philosophical views)

I didn't base my opinions and comments of this church off of one sermon that I saw.  After hearing about him and this church, I researched the church.  I looked at their statements on the church website (which has since been revised), and watched interview after interview of Wright, and watched many sermons by the man.

If you would do the research on this church that I have, then you would come to the same conclusion.


This research I put into most of the opinions that I have made of this man.  Don't think that I just hear something and take it for fact.  I admit that there are a few things that I have posted here without research, but I posted them for topics of discussion, and from there I did research on them.


Like I said, I don't know much about this Economic crisis right now.  Not much of an economist, so it's pretty much over my head.  However, this bailout does fit into the constitution.  The government has the right to spend money to secure the welfare of the nation.  Maybe this crisis would have gotten so bad that it would have been another depression of the 30's, so this bailout stopped that from happening.  That's what it sounds like at least.  Yes it puts more money into the debt that we owe, but it could have stopped a depression from occurring.  Whatever, I could be completely wrong on this.  I feel that it's not right to bail out companies like they did, but who knows...