Stop The Blame Game Hillary

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:05pm

Hillary not content to blame every problem on GWB & Bam Bam now blames Wall St for the economic problems. No one else is to blame. Not those who borrowed knowing full well they could not pay for a home.

Bear in mind Wall St is a major revenue source for NYC & NYS - a state she alledgedly represents. It is where many average citizens invest & where pension funds are invested. It is in everyones best interest to clean it up but not to dump all over it now.

The other day it was the greedy oil companies who set production. Do the oil companies tell opec what to pump? Do the oil companies refuse to drill for oil in ANWAR or is it Washington who says no? Is it greedy oils fault that we will not put nuclear power into the mix thereby forcing more people to use oil? Is it greedy oils fault that people drive around in gas guzzling mini tanks?

People complain about the cost of oil . The other day I saw someone simonizing his car - with the motor running. Does it make the shine stand out better?

She had better stop using easy targets as punching bags in her slash & burn , no prisoners trip to the White House.

Victims have long memories & fight back with a vengence. If Wall St pulls out of NY, it will be a Ghost town. Do you want that Hillary?

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:11pm

Since you don't vote, you don't get to complain.

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:13pm

^ Agreed.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:14pm

Nowhere in the constitution does it say free speech but only if you vote.

I may also come out to vote this year so do not get your knickers in a twist.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:19pm

Good for you.

And you are right, the constitution does not limit free speech to those who vote - but I don't usually bother with twits who have time to complain, but don't bother to actually vote.

I hope you do vote in November.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:22pm

I may very well be an ex twit come November

What about the contents of my post?

[DAME]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:24pm

Oh Roxy. Leave my Hillary alone.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 6:28pm

I am sorry DAME I cannot

She represents NY & its economic engine she bashes over & over . Alas, I cannot

You can have her. If she does not get the nomination, watch for her to sabotage Bam Bam so that she will have a clear field in 4 years. Problem iS, there may be another Obama in the wings. She wants to be coronated & does not like this upstart standing in the way.

The next couple of months will be very interesting.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 7:37pm

I honestly cannot understand exactly what you are getting at in your post.

I think there is plenty of problems with Wall Street, and government oversight is required. You are right that much of the companies wealth is routed through Wall Street, but that does not mean that those managing the wealth should not be held accountable for gross negligence or willful misconduct. If you want to bash financial institutions who recklessly seek profits, gave out obscene amounts of money in bonuses based upon production and sales, and then seek government bailouts when their recklessness comes back to bite them, then I am all for it. You are correct that many people took loans that they should not have, but financial institutions have due diligence standards and underwriting guidelines that were ignored, or liberalized to facilitate unwise loans. Deregulation has been a failure, and more government oversight is necessary - it has been demonstrated that many financial institutions cannot, or will not, maintain the necessary internal controls to have prudent growth and practices.

With regard to the possible windfall taxes on oil companies - I am for them, with the exception that such taxes could be waived if a sufficient amount of profits was in fact reinvested in infrastructure and/or R&D. ANWAR is a red herring, in that it will take at least 10 years to develop the infrastructure to use the resources there, and estimates are that if in production, ANWAR would cut gas prices by about .01 per gallon.

Some of the profits of the oil companies comes directly from the weak value of the dollar, so to an extent, Bush's fiscal policy has exacerbated the gas crises and rewarded Oil Companies.

I am not sure what you are complaining about - but based upon your post, the above is my response.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 8:27pm

Waiving a tax on oil companies? Maybe in Oz but not in the US

No one is blaming the people for their wasteful habits. Wall Street needs some regulations but it does no one any good to use big oil or Wall ST as whipping boys. I know they are easy targets but many poor slobs who make a normal living on Wall St will, through no fault of their own, be out of a job

Anwar could be pumping oil if we had not diddled around for years on it. At some point, people will need to realise the benefits of nuke power. Even some Green people, previously against it, are now for it as a clean non polluting way to produce energy. If France can provide 50 % of their power from it, there is no reason we can not.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 8:38pm

No, I said waiving the windfall tax that is being proposed if a certain amount of profits is reinvested in R&D or development.

Many of us are blaming people for their wasteful habits, as well as speculating on the market, which is why it is so difficult to discern who really deserves help.

That being said, many of us are sick of those who make billions in profits doing everything in their power to avoid paying taxes into the system that enables such profits to be made.

ANWAR is a red herring - it is not a solution to our dependence on foreign oil. I do not disagree with Nuclear options, but we would need better security and controls in place before such options are pursued. Wind and solar options should also be pursued - which is why I would waive the windfall taxes if the money was in fact reinvested in R&D rather than the continuation of our reliance on fossil fuels.

I wonder, were you crying about all of the middle class jobs lost when all of these foreign companies decided to export jobs to other countries? Or, when companies like Haliburton (under Cheney's watch I believe) relocated off-shore purely for tax purposes?

I am sick and tired of corporate America taking advantage of the opportunities this countries offers in sales, while doing everything possible to avoid paying its fair share for the infrastructure that facilitates the sales.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 10:30pm

Many of the jobs lost were because of americans themselves

Yes, greed played a part but a few other factors did. Insatiable demands of the unions pushed the steel companies out of business. The auto industry gold plated benefits adds a few thousand to the cost of each car & that (plus better cars) pushed many americans to buy foreign.

Another factor is frivilous lawsuits by employees pushed many a company to relocate overseas. Saying Haliburton is like pavlov's dog . Say it & you think of evil despite the many hard working people working for it & earning a living

If you seriously believe the same type of things did not happen during democrat administrations, most notably the old Horndog himself, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

Greed is everywhwere from the board room to the auto workers on the line wanting someone else to subsidize their health & other benefits.

Updated On: 5/6/08 at 10:30 PM

[Yawper]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 10:59pm

I hope you'll be happy when the US sinks to third world nation status thanks to all the corporate overseas movement in pursuit of profits.

Or are you one of the Richistanis who will just relocate elsewhere?

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 11:00pm

Roxy, you do not know of what you speak - but that does not surprise me.

I am not so naive as to believe that job loss and the off-shoring of jobs did not happen under President Clinton. But this administration has sold this country out in a way no one could imagine. Populating important government positions with cronies and crooks, and kowtowing to corporate interests over those of the common man and woman. Politicizing non-political positions in a way that is an insult to the common civil servant. Clinton may have had his faults, but competency was at least a prerequisite for those who occupied government jobs.

I say Halliburton as an example of a company that does everything possible to exploit the tax and legal loopholes in the system, that gets rewarded by this Administration, and does nothing to prevent the rape and abuse of women stationed in Iraq. It is the easy example of what is wrong, but I could easily use Blackwater, or other recipients of corporate welfare who receive lucrative government contracts without paying their fair share of taxes. I have a fundamental problem awarding contracts to companies who themselves are not supporting the infrastructure that is so very generous to them.

Unions have been part of the problem, but they have also been a means to protect works who would otherwise have unsafe working conditions, and little if any protection from corporate America.

Your bias is blinding you to the realities of the America we have become. I would rather have an "old Horndog" in office, than a delusional man who thinks he is chosen by God, and who claims to talk to God. Many who make such claims are in mental institutions.

You and I will have to disagree. I pay a large sum in taxes every year - as a single woman with no children, I pay more than my fair share to support this country. I just wish that those who profit most from it would do the same.

[Liverpool]

Posted: 5/6/08 at 11:02pm

Roxy's still stuck in the late 90's except with a new clinton.