Why should I vote for Bush

[bermich]

Brainiac? The first sign of a small mind is name calling. Quoting Fox News is the second.

Who are you quoting. ALL of your posts are based on YOUR OPINION and TRYINGTOGETBIG is posting on FACT and transcripted documentation which was presented NOT JUST ON FOX but on CNN and others.
You are calling him a brainiac? He just proved two of your little quotes on OILprices and Jobs to be incorrect.

[markas214]

Who are you quoting. ALL of your posts are based on YOUR OPINION and TRYINGTOGETBIG is posting on FACT and transcripted documentation which was presented NOT JUST ON FOX but on CNN and others.
You are calling him a brainiac? He just proved two of your little quotes on OILprices and Jobs to be incorrect.

Not quite Bermich. He called me "brainiac" As I don't engage in personal attacks. Are you saying I was wrong that gasoline prices are at historical highs or that 2 1/2 million net jobs were lost during GWs presidency? Do you know what the difference between fact and opinion even is?

[bermich]

Not quite Bermich. He called me "brainiac" As I don't engage in personal attacks. Are you saying I was wrong that gasoline prices are at historical highs or that 2 1/2 million net jobs were lost during GWs presidency? Do you know what the difference between fact and opinion even is?

Yeah I notice you didnt engage him since he proved you wrong on all your counts.
Historical highs? Like I said. Inflation. If you compare prices of a pack of gum to 5 years ago, it will be at an ALLTIME HIGH.

What does the price of gasoline have to do with BUSH? I thought Bush had IRAQI oil now. So now you are saying we should use IRAQI oil to help decrease gas prices? That would go against everythign you are saying.
What do you want? High gas or do you want to use IRAQI oil?

[markas214]

You quote the jobless rate vs the total jobs lost ttgb. Totally different.

[markas214]

38 posts and still notone reason to vote for Bush?

[DADDYDBOL]

38 posts and still notone reason to vote for Bush?

I hearby nominate markas214 for president (aka superman). j/j bro


I gotta go see ya...

[jbol]

38 posts and still notone reason to vote for Bush?

42 posts and still no reason not to vote for bush

[50%Natural]

and here now is the pointless bable of someone whose failure of education in economics is very apparent. It really is stupid that people try to point to figures and such as being GB's fault. Of course he has to take the wrap from the uneducated in the matter as such. I have already discussed(in a previous thread) the role of the business cycles as well as financial indicators for the reasons to send the business cycle in a downward slope to recover later. All throughout history, there are dips in the economy as well as high points. Blaming GB shows that you actually know nothing of this. I would never give any economic success as a job well done to a president nor an economic recession as the presidents fault. Prices of stocks and bonds, required rate of return, economic forecasts such as indicators that scare investors play more of a role in how the nation performs, gdp, employement, and inflation than a president's economic policies ever could. Why don't you think a sec and consider who is really the most powerful man in the united states. It aint the president...it's Alan Greenspan. He is the one who controls the economy not the president. Also, I pointed this out in another thread...you want to get pissed because of the national defficiet? Well lets talk a sec then. Who demolished the army after the persian gulf war? Who made our impressive military, built up in the 80's for the anticipation of nuclear war to protect us, and who trashed it? Who was attacked and our military was the weakest its ever been since preWWII? Why was it the weakest? Well, there is an easy answer and you should remember that. When the people are financing the largest and most advanced army in the world for OUR protection it takes money. That is why bush had to spend. We get attacked and we don't have ****. I'd really like you to take that first statement of your thread and show it to any soilder protecting our ass from the rag heads that live for our deaths to advance their own. And, for your information, since you love to quote such tell tale figures, how is the economy doing now? You won't give GB the credit for that so why stick him with the burden of a post 911 economy where millions of jobs were lost as the center of commerce in our nation was destroyed. Man, I wish I could be a hippy

[DADDYDBOL]

and here now is the pointless bable of someone whose failure of education in economics is very apparent. It really is stupid that people try to point to figures and such as being GB's fault. Of course he has to take the wrap from the uneducated in the matter as such. I have already discussed(in a previous thread) the role of the business cycles as well as financial indicators for the reasons to send the business cycle in a downward slope to recover later. All throughout history, there are dips in the economy as well as high points. Blaming GB shows that you actually know nothing of this. I would never give any economic success as a job well done to a president nor an economic recession as the presidents fault. Prices of stocks and bonds, required rate of return, economic forecasts such as indicators that scare investors play more of a role in how the nation performs, gdp, employement, and inflation than a president's economic policies ever could. Why don't you think a sec and consider who is really the most powerful man in the united states. It aint the president...it's Alan Greenspan. He is the one who controls the economy not the president. Also, I pointed this out in another thread...you want to get pissed because of the national defficiet? Well lets talk a sec then. Who demolished the army after the persian gulf war? Who made our impressive military, built up in the 80's for the anticipation of nuclear war to protect us, and who trashed it? Who was attacked and our military was the weakest its ever been since preWWII? Why was it the weakest? Well, there is an easy answer and you should remember that. When the people are financing the largest and most advanced army in the world for OUR protection it takes money. That is why bush had to spend. We get attacked and we don't have ****. I'd really like you to take that first statement of your thread and show it to any soilder protecting our ass from the rag heads that live for our deaths to advance their own. And, for your information, since you love to quote such tell tale figures, how is the economy doing now? You won't give GB the credit for that so why stick him with the burden of a post 911 economy where millions of jobs were lost as the center of commerce in our nation was destroyed. Man, I wish I could be a hippy

Bro you are my freakin hero....the truth will set you free...

[markas214]

and here now is the pointless bable of someone whose failure of education in economics is very apparent. It really is stupid that people try to point to figures and such as being GB's fault. Of course he has to take the wrap from the uneducated in the matter as such. I have already discussed(in a previous thread) the role of the business cycles as well as financial indicators for the reasons to send the business cycle in a downward slope to recover later. All throughout history, there are dips in the economy as well as high points. Blaming GB shows that you actually know nothing of this. I would never give any economic success as a job well done to a president nor an economic recession as the presidents fault. Prices of stocks and bonds, required rate of return, economic forecasts such as indicators that scare investors play more of a role in how the nation performs, gdp, employement, and inflation than a president's economic policies ever could. Why don't you think a sec and consider who is really the most powerful man in the united states. It aint the president...it's Alan Greenspan. He is the one who controls the economy not the president. Also, I pointed this out in another thread...you want to get pissed because of the national defficiet? Well lets talk a sec then. Who demolished the army after the persian gulf war? Who made our impressive military, built up in the 80's for the anticipation of nuclear war to protect us, and who trashed it? Who was attacked and our military was the weakest its ever been since preWWII? Why was it the weakest? Well, there is an easy answer and you should remember that. When the people are financing the largest and most advanced army in the world for OUR protection it takes money. That is why bush had to spend. We get attacked and we don't have ****. I'd really like you to take that first statement of your thread and show it to any soilder protecting our ass from the rag heads that live for our deaths to advance their own. And, for your information, since you love to quote such tell tale figures, how is the economy doing now? You won't give GB the credit for that so why stick him with the burden of a post 911 economy where millions of jobs were lost as the center of commerce in our nation was destroyed. Man, I wish I could be a hippy

50% I appreciate your opinion. While I disagree at least you present it in an intelligent way. But, please don't tell me I know nothing of business cycles. At my age I've lived through several including ones with 10% unemployment or 20% interest rates. I think my biggest gripe is the transfer of wealth from the middle class to a very few wealthy elite. It used to be that if profitability and productivity increased the workers pay went up in proportion to to execs. Now the extra profits are being hoarded by the CEOs and wealthy shareholders. Look at these guys. Cisco's chairman makes 700 million dollars in a year that the companies valuation was cut in half. Real wages of working Americans is declining while there is an accumulation of wealth not seen since the days of the oil barons.

[50%Natural]

50% I appreciate your opinion. While I disagree at least you present it in an intelligent way. But, please don't tell me I know nothing of business cycles. At my age I've lived through several including ones with 10% unemployment or 20% interest rates. I think my biggest gripe is the transfer of wealth from the middle class to a very few wealthy elite. It used to be that if profitability and productivity increased the workers pay went up in proportion to to execs. Now the extra profits are being hoarded by the CEOs and wealthy shareholders. Look at these guys. Cisco's chairman makes 700 million dollars in a year that the companies valuation was cut in half. Real wages of working Americans is declining while there is an accumulation of wealth not seen since the days of the oil barons.

I know you have lived through several. I would think though that maybe you would understand that the president has little control over the economy. That is my point. I don't like it when people hide behind figures that don't really tell the whole story. Graphs of unelmployemnt and such should include a z axis or something to include investments or some sort of a financial position that shows why the jobs are being lost or something and they have nothing to do with the president. Yes, I agree that it does suck that ceo's are making so much money but that didn't seem like a big topic of your original post. It was the bashing of a president who pulled us out of the worst domestic terrorist attack to day. I think you should give some credit to a man who is trying to keep our asses alive.

[DADDYDBOL]

I was wondering when Bermich would come in...good to see you bro.

[50%Natural]

Also a little side note, the state of the nation has come to where if the nation has to spend more than the minimum(**** near nothing) on the military, there is going to be a defficit. The nation screwed itself a long time ago when it had to get out of the depression. I forget, but who was the party in charge at that time? We are a wellfare nation, lets just accept it. Look at all the money that goes to programs that in the eyes of the average tax payer(middle class) that are a waste and suck. We got welfare, wic, programs to help the inner city youth, blah blah blah. This nation's economic problems started the second the government decided it had the right to interviene in everyone's lifes to try to make it better(social security). It just got the snowball rolling and now, it is George Bush's fault because it is an avalanche and always will be because public officials would be beaten if they withdrew all the aid oh so common that "helps" the deprived. If one politician said he wanted to just cut those stupid ass programs that the government wastes money on(such as income supplementation of the indians) then then next politician would come along only to make a career out of blowing our money. Wake up, it is a never ending cycle and will only get worse. Like the day when social security fails, but we wont' worry about that, it will just be the presidents fault at the time right?

[DADDYDBOL]

Also a little side note, the state of the nation has come to where if the nation has to spend more than the minimum(**** near nothing) on the military, there is going to be a defficit. The nation screwed itself a long time ago when it had to get out of the depression. I forget, but who was the party in charge at that time? We are a wellfare nation, lets just accept it. Look at all the money that goes to programs that in the eyes of the average tax payer(middle class) that are a waste and suck. We got welfare, wic, programs to help the inner city youth, blah blah blah. This nation's economic problems started the second the government decided it had the right to interviene in everyone's lifes to try to make it better(social security). It just got the snowball rolling and now, it is George Bush's fault because it is an avalanche and always will be because public officials would be beaten if they withdrew all the aid oh so common that "helps" the deprived. If one politician said he wanted to just cut those stupid ass programs that the government wastes money on(such as income supplementation of the indians) then then next politician would come along only to make a career out of blowing our money. Wake up, it is a never ending cycle and will only get worse. Like the day when social security fails, but we wont' worry about that, it will just be the presidents fault at the time right?

Exactly and instead of rewarding the bussiness owners who provide jobs and secure the growth of the economy we try to tax the hell out of them and punish them for working hard and having sucess.

[bermich]

Exactly and instead of rewarding the bussiness owners who provide jobs and secure the growth of the economy we try to tax the hell out of them and punish them for working hard and having sucess.

How else are we supposed to take care of our debt that our kids are gonna pay off if WE dont pay our taxes???? You want lower taxes and yet you dont want your kids to have a national debt to pay??

So let me get this straight. You dont want to pay the debt and leave it for the kids, BUT you dont want to leave the debt for your kids?
So what do you want???

[DADDYDBOL]

How else are we supposed to take care of our debt that our kids are gonna pay off if WE dont pay our taxes???? You want lower taxes and yet you dont want your kids to have a national debt to pay??

So let me get this straight. You dont want to pay the debt and leave it for the kids, BUT you dont want to leave the debt for your kids?
So what do you want???

Huh? I don't understand the question.

I am saying we should not put the majority of the tax burden on the rich, why tax them heavier for their sucess? I think they should pay their share but they should not carry the majority due to their sucess.

What motivates me to open another branch? So I will have higher taxes? My family has owned a very sucessfull bussiness and they sold it and sent it down the drain because of this. Its not what America is about, I understand that it must get paid but when you take the motivation out of small business owners you are cutting Americas throat.

[bermich]

Huh? I don't understand the question.

I am saying we should not put the majority of the tax burden on the rich, why tax them heavier for their sucess? I think they should pay their share but they should not carry the majority due to their sucess.

What motivates me to open another branch? So I will have higher taxes? My family has owned a very sucessfull bussiness and they sold it and sent it down the drain because of this. Its not what America is about, I understand that it must get paid but when you take the motivation out of small business owners you are cutting Americas throat.

I agree. Im not familiar with the tax bracket for poor middle and rich. All I know is I will pay taxes to have a military to protect me and a nation that can import and export for profit.
China is about to kick our ass in every aspect. Business, military exporting, etc.

[markas214]

Exactly and instead of rewarding the bussiness owners who provide jobs and secure the growth of the economy we try to tax the hell out of them and punish them for working hard and having sucess.

True but don't forget who's busting his *ss to make him that money. Also there used to be a thing called corporate responsibility where the employer rewarded the employee with decent pay, medical and pension benefits, The trend now is to pay as little as possible and keep all the profits for themselves. Who do you think is better off? A guy making 25k a year taxed at 20% and being left with 20k or the guy making 600k taxed at 40% and being left with 360k. Also these noble business owners are moving jobs overseas to squeeze every penny possible into their own pockets.

[bermich]

True but don't forget who's busting his *ss to make him that money. Also there used to be a thing called corporate responsibility where the employer rewarded the employee with decent pay, medical and pension benefits, The trend now is to pay as little as possible and keep all the profits for themselves. Who do you think is better off? A guy making 25k a year taxed at 20% and being left with 20k or the guy making 600k taxed at 40% and being left with 360k. Also these noble business owners are moving jobs overseas to squeeze every penny possible into their own pockets.

Well now. With the democratics forcing companies to provide health care and workmens compensation and all that, I wonder why companies are being forces over seas. People want FREE medicare and they also want to be paid more. People must see that there has to be a balance.

Without the rich, the middle class wouldnt have any jobs. Dont start griping at the rich cause if you were rich you wouldnt be griping.
Workmens comp PER employee is 400 dollars a month. That is a lot of money. Not including his medicare which is another 100 dollars average.
So it costs 500 dollars out of the business owners pocket just to HAVE an employee.

[DADDYDBOL]

Well now. With the democratics forcing companies to provide health care and workmens compensation and all that, I wonder why companies are being forces over seas. People want FREE medicare and they also want to be paid more. People must see that there has to be a balance.

Without the rich, the middle class wouldnt have any jobs. Dont start griping at the rich cause if you were rich you wouldnt be griping.
Workmens comp PER employee is 400 dollars a month. That is a lot of money. Not including his medicare which is another 100 dollars average.
So it costs 500 dollars out of the business owners pocket just to HAVE an employee.

Uhh my point exactly...

[50%Natural]

True but don't forget who's busting his *ss to make him that money. Also there used to be a thing called corporate responsibility where the employer rewarded the employee with decent pay, medical and pension benefits, The trend now is to pay as little as possible and keep all the profits for themselves. Who do you think is better off? A guy making 25k a year taxed at 20% and being left with 20k or the guy making 600k taxed at 40% and being left with 360k. Also these noble business owners are moving jobs overseas to squeeze every penny possible into their own pockets.

actually, the trend is to help make stock holders happy as the are the center point of the economy. If the stockholders aren't happy or don't want to invest then the company will fail to exists except in bankruptcy.

[markas214]

actually, the trend is to help make stock holders happy as the are the center point of the economy. If the stockholders aren't happy or don't want to invest then the company will fail to exists except in bankruptcy.

So what happens to everyone else? The stockholders are happy but what about the workers? Do we just leave them with poor health, housing, and education? We are losing the balance here. I am secure in my job but does that mean I should care less for those who are less fortunate? The problem with politicians is they can't see past the next election. Do you have kids 50%? I do and I am concerned about what kind of future we are creating for them.

[Dude-Man]

All i want to know is, Where's osama? why are there still terrorists? Why hasn't bush solved the problem?

The answers please.

[DADDYDBOL]

All i want to know is, Where's osama? why are there still terrorists? Why hasn't bush solved the problem?

The answers please.

Why didn't Clinton??

Why don't you??

You annoy me...

[50%Natural]

markas you got anything to say about my long ass post? I want to know because you demanded an educational viewpoint to the topic.

[bermich]

As far as the patriot act that Bush signed. I disagree with that and he totally walked over the constitution. He said it was temporary for a year but I dont believe it. I can say though, he is the better of the two as far as a race between demos and repubs.
This is not a time for the nation to be weak with a demo in office. It is not a time for America to let the terrorists rest and regroup. It is time to continue hitting them and using our resources to obtain a territorial advantage. I dont feel a democratic president is a good thing to have right now. Maybe later, but not now.

[bermich]

Speaking of Alan Greenspan. You can look at this one of two ways or both ways. I brought up the house issue earlier in CALIF. I dont know about other states but before 3 years ago, CAs interest rate was about 7-8 percent. Now, Alan G felt that the economy was doing good so he dropped the interest rate to an average 4-5 percent. That is a savings on average of 4-500 dollars a month on a house.
At that point, a lot of first time home buyers were able to qualify for a house.
All those elidgable looked for houses at the SAME TIME. Houses were in demand and quantities were limited so houses at 200,000 dollars went up LITERALLY in 2 years to 400,000. The next year they went up still. Now that same 200,000 dollar house sells for 500,000. All the first time home buyers have a sizeable profit in their home they just bought without putting a dime into it. GOOD THING.
BAD THING. Now everyone who doesnt own a house CAN NOT buy a house at 500,000 dollars. Especailly since those houses once cost 200,000 only 2 years ago and are not worth 500,000.
So ALAN really ****ed up CA on that one.
It has nothing to do with BUSH. It has to do with much more indepth workings that I dont fully understand.
The market will stabalize, the interest rates will go up. People wont qualify and houses wont sell as fast. People selling their house will find it more difficult to find buyers, the house will sell for less to make a quick sale. People will wait for that good deal on a house and wait forcing other houses to lower their prices.
In 4 years, those same 500,000 houses will once again be selling for 300 maybe 350.
It has nothing to do with who is president.

[50%Natural]

Speaking of Alan Greenspan. You can look at this one of two ways or both ways. I brought up the house issue earlier in CALIF. I dont know about other states but before 3 years ago, CAs interest rate was about 7-8 percent. Now, Alan G felt that the economy was doing good so he dropped the interest rate to an average 4-5 percent. That is a savings on average of 4-500 dollars a month on a house.
At that point, a lot of first time home buyers were able to qualify for a house.
All those elidgable looked for houses at the SAME TIME. Houses were in demand and quantities were limited so houses at 200,000 dollars went up LITERALLY in 2 years to 400,000. The next year they went up still. Now that same 200,000 dollar house sells for 500,000. All the first time home buyers have a sizeable profit in their home they just bought without putting a dime into it. GOOD THING.
BAD THING. Now everyone who doesnt own a house CAN NOT buy a house at 500,000 dollars. Especailly since those houses once cost 200,000 only 2 years ago and are not worth 500,000.
So ALAN really ****ed up CA on that one.
It has nothing to do with BUSH. It has to do with much more indepth workings that I dont fully understand.
The market will stabalize, the interest rates will go up. People wont qualify and houses wont sell as fast. People selling their house will find it more difficult to find buyers, the house will sell for less to make a quick sale. People will wait for that good deal on a house and wait forcing other houses to lower their prices.
In 4 years, those same 500,000 houses will once again be selling for 300 maybe 350.
It has nothing to do with who is president.

\

Actually, Greenspan will only drop interest rates if the economy is slowing to spur people to spend money

[markas214]

Speaking of Alan Greenspan. You can look at this one of two ways or both ways. I brought up the house issue earlier in CALIF. I dont know about other states but before 3 years ago, CAs interest rate was about 7-8 percent. Now, Alan G felt that the economy was doing good so he dropped the interest rate to an average 4-5 percent. That is a savings on average of 4-500 dollars a month on a house.
At that point, a lot of first time home buyers were able to qualify for a house.
All those elidgable looked for houses at the SAME TIME. Houses were in demand and quantities were limited so houses at 200,000 dollars went up LITERALLY in 2 years to 400,000. The next year they went up still. Now that same 200,000 dollar house sells for 500,000. All the first time home buyers have a sizeable profit in their home they just bought without putting a dime into it. GOOD THING.
BAD THING. Now everyone who doesnt own a house CAN NOT buy a house at 500,000 dollars. Especailly since those houses once cost 200,000 only 2 years ago and are not worth 500,000.
So ALAN really ****ed up CA on that one.
It has nothing to do with BUSH. It has to do with much more indepth workings that I dont fully understand.
The market will stabalize, the interest rates will go up. People wont qualify and houses wont sell as fast. People selling their house will find it more difficult to find buyers, the house will sell for less to make a quick sale. People will wait for that good deal on a house and wait forcing other houses to lower their prices.
In 4 years, those same 500,000 houses will once again be selling for 300 maybe 350.
It has nothing to do with who is president.

The housing market is going crazy here also. I'd hate to be looking for a first house these days. It could just well be a housing bubble. The ones who will be f*cked will be those who buy at the top and end up with a couple hundred k of negative equity.
The thing you are missing about the rich is that they are no longer satisfied making 5 or 6 hundred k a year. They now have to make hundreds of millions and still don't want to pay taxes. Look at the companies incorporating the Bahamas. They are willing to take all the benefits the USA affirds them but are not willing to pay their share of taxes.

[DADDYDBOL]

The housing market is going crazy here also. I'd hate to be looking for a first house these days. It could just well be a housing bubble. The ones who will be f*cked will be those who buy at the top and end up with a couple hundred k of negative equity.
The thing you are missing about the rich is that they are no longer satisfied making 5 or 6 hundred k a year. They now have to make hundreds of millions and still don't want to pay taxes. Look at the companies incorporating the Bahamas. They are willing to take all the benefits the USA affirds them but are not willing to pay their share of taxes.

Bro the rich are the most heavily taxed to date....and yet they still get up every morning and try to continue providing jobs and expanding to provide some type of viable market place. So since you won the race today tomorrow you have to start at the back? That makes no sense....

[markas214]

Bro the rich are the most heavily taxed to date....and yet they still get up every morning and try to continue providing jobs and expanding to provide some type of viable market place. So since you won the race today tomorrow you have to start at the back? That makes no sense....

So do I feel sorry for the rich owners of Walmart or the poor slob working for them who can barly feed his family?

[DADDYDBOL]

So do I feel sorry for the rich owners of Walmart or the poor slob working for them who can barly feed his family?

This is a very calous response but "survival of the fittest"....


So the guy who busted his ass and sacarficed in school should be responsible for the gangbanger who under a court order has finally gotten his sh*t together? Oh yeh he also has 4 kids none of which he has given a single dollar and while he sells coke he is collecting a welfare check and an unemployment check. Uh I kinda look up to the rich owners now...at least they are something I can strive to become in the land of oppurtunity....remember?

[50%Natural]

So do I feel sorry for the rich owners of Walmart or the poor slob working for them who can barly feed his family?

And I am sure this poor slob could have made something better of their lives than to run the register at walmart. I can think of the people at the walmart across the street. They could at one point decided they had ambition and done something else. But hey, this is about how terrible Bush is right? What people make of their lives is their own business. If you weren't happy with your life right now, get another degree or get one if you don't have one. Your earning power will be significantly greater with a college degree or masters if you already have a degree. Take the next step if you aren't happy with your income and want to provide more to your children.
http://www.myconsumerguide.com/unive...of_phoenix.htm

[spywizard]

Berm........... I feel ya....... I was in California in 87 when there was a "correction" that will probably happen again..

Houses that were bought for $200,000 were only worth $125,000 after the rates went up............

So yes there is a problem as you have stated.........

but like so many other things.... there is always a correction....


and Mark........

Dude........... you are spouting as a "Socialist" is that what you believe.....

Me as an individual........... I get tired of paying $36,000 a year in taxes........ and i'm not rich.................

If i didn't provide a company for the 4 people that work for me......... they would still be making $65,000 a year instead of the $130,000 they make now..

So......... is it a good thing for me to have created this company??? or is it better that everyone have a job with the post office.??????

And you stated you have a secure Job............ dude........ it could be sold tomorrow......... you out on the street......

but then again.. you could get the 52 weeks of unemployment.......... If that's what makes you happy (security) good for ya............ we always need people like you........... to do the work..................

Speaking of Alan Greenspan. You can look at this one of two ways or both ways. I brought up the house issue earlier in CALIF. I dont know about other states but before 3 years ago, CAs interest rate was about 7-8 percent. Now, Alan G felt that the economy was doing good so he dropped the interest rate to an average 4-5 percent. That is a savings on average of 4-500 dollars a month on a house.
At that point, a lot of first time home buyers were able to qualify for a house.
All those elidgable looked for houses at the SAME TIME. Houses were in demand and quantities were limited so houses at 200,000 dollars went up LITERALLY in 2 years to 400,000. The next year they went up still. Now that same 200,000 dollar house sells for 500,000. All the first time home buyers have a sizeable profit in their home they just bought without putting a dime into it. GOOD THING.
BAD THING. Now everyone who doesnt own a house CAN NOT buy a house at 500,000 dollars. Especailly since those houses once cost 200,000 only 2 years ago and are not worth 500,000.
So ALAN really ****ed up CA on that one.
It has nothing to do with BUSH. It has to do with much more indepth workings that I dont fully understand.
The market will stabalize, the interest rates will go up. People wont qualify and houses wont sell as fast. People selling their house will find it more difficult to find buyers, the house will sell for less to make a quick sale. People will wait for that good deal on a house and wait forcing other houses to lower their prices.
In 4 years, those same 500,000 houses will once again be selling for 300 maybe 350.
It has nothing to do with who is president.

[markas214]

Berm........... I feel ya....... I was in California in 87 when there was a "correction" that will probably happen again..

Houses that were bought for $200,000 were only worth $125,000 after the rates went up............

So yes there is a problem as you have stated.........

but like so many other things.... there is always a correction....


and Mark........

Dude........... you are spouting as a "Socialist" is that what you believe.....

Me as an individual........... I get tired of paying $36,000 a year in taxes........ and i'm not rich.................

If i didn't provide a company for the 4 people that work for me......... they would still be making $65,000 a year instead of the $130,000 they make now..

So......... is it a good thing for me to have created this company??? or is it better that everyone have a job with the post office.??????

And you stated you have a secure Job............ dude........ it could be sold tomorrow......... you out on the street......

but then again.. you could get the 52 weeks of unemployment.......... If that's what makes you happy (security) good for ya............ we always need people like you........... to do the work..................

My job will be around as long as people continue to get sick or injured. My field is hurting and we make more each year. If you ever get hurt or have a heart attack in eastern Pa it could be me pushing compressions, shooting atropine and epi into your veins or giving you 300 joules of electricity to save your *ss. Try outsourcing that. As I said before I do better than most and work hard and do a lot of continuing education. I still believe in capitalism as it provides incentive for success and is the best system on the planet. I am far from being a socialist. The funny thing is when it comes to healtth care we joke around when people are without insurance or on welfare. We know who pays the bill in the end. You and I.

[spywizard]

Thanks.......... that tells alot of the why you are stating alot of what you believe.........

makes alot of sense now..

Just wanted to say.......... thanks.......

My oldest came to me when she was 12... said she wanted to be a Doc... I said great... the next day i took her to the hospital to sign up for the candy stripper program...

she was in it for 4 years...

she is now a Radiologist............ (sorry Tech) she has the degree though...

and loves it..

I tell people that your profession, Medical.... is the only one worth going to college for..

Thanks again.........

My job will be around as long as people continue to get sick or injured. My field is hurting and we make more each year. If you ever get hurt or have a heart attack in eastern Pa it could be me pushing compressions, shooting atropine and epi into your veins or giving you 300 joules of electricity to save your *ss. Try outsourcing that. As I said before I do better than most and work hard and do a lot of continuing education. I still believe in capitalism as it provides incentive for success and is the best system on the planet. I am far from being a socialist. The funny thing is when it comes to healtth care we joke around when people are without insurance or on welfare. We know who pays the bill in the end. You and I.

[DADDYDBOL]

You know we do need each other, I shudder to think what would happen if a greedy bussiness owner with no regard to the public or the earth would do to us and in the same hand I am ashamed to think of what the US would become if we handed it over to a bunch of weak, pity seeking liberals.

[tryingtogetbig]

damit...I left for a while...glad I did...the debate was turned over to some very worthy bros...you guys rock!!

seriously...the topice of the thread has long been dead...never discuss religion and politics...golden rule...yet I always fall back into these discussions...

Glad to see it got back to a more "civil" debate...good job guys (all of you...even the evil democrats!!). lol

peace,

ttgb

[50%Natural]

seriously...the topic of the thread has long been dead

very true

[tryingtogetbig]

There is a statistic somewhere that shows that people vote democrat through college, late 20's etc. Then after 30 when they start making money they all start voting Republican.