Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Reply to thread

Message

With the amount of ARM's that will adjust in 2009 it seems clear why the banks are holding money. Not to mention corporate lines of credit as well, but the banks are not lending money most likely because they are trying to shore themselves up for the disaster that will come this year.

Further, you do nothing to address the problem at the root of the problem. Artificial credit and major debt. You basically advocate for more of it.

You are attempting to claim that an attempt to buy an airplane is an example of trickle-down economics. That is a farce. The jet purchase was ridiculous, but it hardly defines an economic school of thought.

Massive government spending... funded by the taxpayers....

We have handed them in excess of $7 TRILLION dollars in bailouts and guarantees and yet they continue to need more. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are already asking for billions more. Claiming "put the money in the banks to shore them up" will cost well in excess of an additional trillion dollars... who funds that? The taxpayer.

What we are in for in is massive inflation if this spending continues.

Comments like this do serious damage to your credibility.

<blockquote data-quote="BigRob" data-source="post: 84621" data-attributes="member: 628">With the amount of ARM&#039;s that will adjust in 2009 it seems clear why the banks are holding money.&nbsp; Not to mention corporate lines of credit as well, but the banks are not lending money most likely because they are trying to shore themselves up for the disaster that will come this year.&nbsp; Further, you do nothing to address the problem at the root of the problem.&nbsp; Artificial credit and major debt.&nbsp; You basically advocate for more of it.&nbsp; You are attempting to claim that an attempt to buy an airplane is an example of trickle-down economics.&nbsp; That is a farce.&nbsp; The jet purchase was ridiculous, but it hardly defines an economic school of thought.&nbsp; Massive government spending... funded by the taxpayers....We have handed them in excess of $7 TRILLION dollars in bailouts and guarantees and yet they continue to need more.&nbsp; Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are already asking for billions more.&nbsp; Claiming &quot;put the money in the banks to shore them up&quot; will cost well in excess of an additional trillion dollars... who funds that?&nbsp; The taxpayer. What we are in for in is massive inflation if this spending continues.&nbsp; Comments like this do serious damage to your credibility.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BigRob, post: 84621, member: 628"] With the amount of ARM's that will adjust in 2009 it seems clear why the banks are holding money. Not to mention corporate lines of credit as well, but the banks are not lending money most likely because they are trying to shore themselves up for the disaster that will come this year. Further, you do nothing to address the problem at the root of the problem. Artificial credit and major debt. You basically advocate for more of it. You are attempting to claim that an attempt to buy an airplane is an example of trickle-down economics. That is a farce. The jet purchase was ridiculous, but it hardly defines an economic school of thought. Massive government spending... funded by the taxpayers.... We have handed them in excess of $7 TRILLION dollars in bailouts and guarantees and yet they continue to need more. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are already asking for billions more. Claiming "put the money in the banks to shore them up" will cost well in excess of an additional trillion dollars... who funds that? The taxpayer. What we are in for in is massive inflation if this spending continues. Comments like this do serious damage to your credibility. [/QUOTE]

Verification