 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1... 4 5 6 7 8 ...10  Previous Next
|
|
Global Economic Meltdown |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | @ Hal and Rico Are you two completely daft or is reading comprehension not your strong suit? Did you bother to read what I wrote? It sure doesn't seem like you did as your comments show a complete lack of understanding. Let me try an analogy, or three... When you buy a house with a fixed APR you know, based on that interest rate, how much house you can afford. If the bank came along, after the fact, and increased that interest rate five times, could you still afford that house? Would it be your fault that you couldn't? When you buy a car, you are given an interest rate. Based on that interest rate, and the length of the loan, you know how much car you can afford. If the bank came along, after the fact, and increased that interest rate five times, could you still afford that car? Would it be your fault? When you take out a business or personal loan, you are given an interst rate. Based on that interest rate, you know how much money you can afford to borrow. If the bank came along, after the fact, and increased that interest rate five times, could you still afford that loan? Would it be your fault? I don't know about you, but I bought my truck because I got a decent interest rate...4.99%. I would not have made the purchase if the rate had been 25%. First, because that is an idiotic rate and, second, because I wouldn't have been able to afford it. Credit card companies are taking away that choice. They let people make purchases at one rate then jack that rate up. How you can blame the consumer for that is beyond me.  Edit: On second read, my opening statement came out harsher than I intended. For that I apologize.  | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 4,596 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
@ Hal and Rico
Are you two completely daft or is reading comprehension not your strong suit? Did you bother to read what I wrote? It sure doesn't seem like you did as your comments show a complete lack of understanding. Let me try an analogy, or three...
When you buy a house with a fixed APR you know, based on that interest rate, how much house you can afford. If the bank came along, after the fact, and increased that interest rate five times, could you still afford that house? Would it be your fault that you couldn't?
When you buy a car, you are given an interest rate. Based on that interest rate, and the length of the loan, you know how much car you can afford. If the bank came along, after the fact, and increased that interest rate five times, could you still afford that car? Would it be your fault?
When you take out a business or personal loan, you are given an interst rate. Based on that interest rate, you know how much money you can afford to borrow. If the bank came along, after the fact, and increased that interest rate five times, could you still afford that loan? Would it be your fault?
I don't know about you, but I bought my truck because I got a decent interest rate...4.99%. I would not have made the purchase if the rate had been 25%. First, because that is an idiotic rate and, second, because I wouldn't have been able to afford it. Credit card companies are taking away that choice. They let people make purchases at one rate then jack that rate up. How you can blame the consumer for that is beyond me. Probably because when the consumer signs the credit agreement he/she is well aware of the clause in the agreement that states the maximum percentage rate that can be charged and that this rate can be applied at any time without prior notification. Buyer Beware!. You take your chances when dealing with credit. That's why I cut up my credit cards 10 years ago and only deal in cash now. | | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting 8ballMax: Quote:
Probably because when the consumer signs the credit agreement he/she is well aware of the clause in the agreement that states the maximum percentage rate that can be charged and that this rate can be applied at any time without prior notification. Buyer Beware!. You take your chances when dealing with credit. That's why I cut up my credit cards 10 years ago and only deal in cash now. Oddly enough, I have no quarrel with that clause. The problem I have is that they apply it in a retroactive manner. This type of 'bait and switch' can't be done with any other loan, why can it be done here? Fortunately, from what I have read, legislators are looking into this practice and are considering legislation to stop it. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,394 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Please xplain to me how the credit card company forced people to charge stuff on their credit cards, without the ability to actually pay for it when the bill arrived? The problem doesn't come with credit card compananies "forcing" people to charge stuff they can't pay for. The problem is that they offer low interest rates and high lines of credit to encourage people to use the card -- and THEN increase the low rate by 5 times (using Unicus' example) as soon as the cardholder uses the card. That happens whether or not the user can afford what he is charging. But this is typical of the current banking practices. First they encourage people to use ATMs for the convenience of not having to go to live tellers. Then, they cut back on the number of tellers they employ. Then they want to charge people to use the ATM cards, conveniently forgetting that they were able to significantly improve their cost of doing business by reducing staff. But, as Unicus says, legislators are beginning to look into these practices, so maybe there's hope. Not much hope, but some hope. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole)
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges.
DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
| | Registered: April 8, 2007 | | Posts: 1,057 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hi Guys, Good for you 8ball! Also another way to say it is "caveat em tour." or Quote:
Buyer Beware! Unicus - first I'm not daft, I did read & comprehend you thoughts, & let's try & keep the conversation civil! Yes & Yes to your two examples. You would be personally responsible for making a poor choice, in dealing with the those companies. Bad or wrong decision are made all the time, still responsibility belongs to the choice maker. Often time it can be very difficult to discern (e.g. that credit card company) which deal is best. Again I have empathy for your situation, that company boarded on being crooks, but still you chose to do business with them. Your responsibility! Take Care Rico | | | If I felt any better I'd be sick!
Envy is mental theft. If you covet another mans possessions, then you should be willing to take on his responsibilities, heartaches, and troubles, along with his money. D. Koontz |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rico: Quote:
Hi Rifter,
'Enough is enough' - What laws have been broken? Bad decisions were made, with good intentions. We do not, send folks to jail for poor decision making. Regarding factual information, I've missed some of your sources, as well as Skips. Just finding some one who agrees with your political stance, or echos your comments is not fact! This is why I keep saying (to deaf ears) evidence from both sidesmakes your argument more believable. Example I expect Hannity, Limbaugh etc. to say Obama is a Marxist (goes with the territory), but should Pelosi etc say Obama is a Marxist; I would sit up & pay attention.
Long before Pelosi & company Reps. had a chance to get the job done, they failed. Back in 2002 WSJ reported that Fannie was cooking the books. Why was nothing done then?
Why are you avoiding the 'personal responsibility' & 'solutions' aspects of my post?
Take Care
Rico You ask why nothing was done in 2002? Bush and McCain both tried to do something, and the Dems prevented it. That is a matter of public record. Personal responsibility doesn't enter into the Democrats lexicon. Good god, look at what they did when it became known that Clinton lied to the grand jury. Instead of condemning his actions, Al Gore and the entire Democrat congress gathered on the White House lawn in a show of solidarity for Clinton's innocence. Pelosi and Reid are not there for the country, they are there for themselves first and the Democrat Party second. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rico: Quote:
Hi Guys,
Good for you 8ball! Also another way to say it is "caveat em tour." or Quote:
Buyer Beware!
Unicus - first I'm not daft, I did read & comprehend you thoughts, & let's try & keep the conversation civil!
Yes & Yes to your two examples. You would be personally responsible for making a poor choice, in dealing with the those companies. Bad or wrong decision are made all the time, still responsibility belongs to the choice maker. Often time it can be very difficult to discern (e.g. that credit card company) which deal is best. Again I have empathy for your situation, that company boarded on being crooks, but still you chose to do business with them. Your responsibility!
Take Care
Rico Rico: The day is not wasted.  It's caveat emptor. But your translation was correct. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Question, what was one of the biggest promises which her highness Nancy J. Pelosi made realtive to what Congress would do and failed utterly at. In fact they never even made so much as a half-hearted attempt to meet the promise.
Here's a hint...Is it cheaper today then it was 2006?
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rico: Quote:
Unicus - first I'm not daft, I did read & comprehend you thoughts, & let's try & keep the conversation civil! I apologized for that at the end of my post.  Quote:
Yes & Yes to your two examples. You would be personally responsible for making a poor choice, in dealing with the those companies. Bad or wrong decision are made all the time, still responsibility belongs to the choice maker. Often time it can be very difficult to discern (e.g. that credit card company) which deal is best. Again I have empathy for your situation, that company boarded on being crooks, but still you chose to do business with them. Your responsibility! It must be wonderful to have the ability to forsee every potential problem and avoid it. Sorry, but you are just shoveling loads of crap. You are acting like this practice was a normal thing and people should have known better. The problem with your line of thinking is nobody saw this practice coming. My guess, is that you hadn't heard of this practice until I mentioned it. Whether it be a car loan, a personal loan, a business loan or a fixed rate home loan, the interest rate on the money you have already borrowed can not be increased. Why would anybody believe that credit card loans would be any different? Using your logic, if a bank closes and people lose their money it is their own fault because they chose to put their money in the bank...right? MBNA was one of the companies that started this practice. When they were aquired by Bank of America in 2006, a number of MBNA execs were booted off the BofA board of directors due to their fears that their unethical practices could result in criminal charges against them under a number of statutes including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. I wonder if those fears were based on the fact that the consumer was responsible? Some how, I don't think they were. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: May 26, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,879 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Good god, look at what they did when it became known that Clinton lied to the grand jury. Instead of condemning his actions, Al Gore and the entire Democrat congress gathered on the White House lawn in a show of solidarity for Clinton's innocence. Is it still so important that Clinton lied? He's a politician, of course he lied. What I've always thought was important isn't so much whether or not a politician is lying (it's a given) but what he's lying about. Clinton lied about having a sexual affair. Bush has lied about the reasons to go to war. Other current and previous politicians lied about a multitude of other things (including both sex and war). Now, cliche as this is, no one died when Clinton lied. I'll take that lie any day over one that has cost the lives of over 4100 American soldiers and anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians (estimates vary that much, so I'll keep the range). Finally, as for the Democrats rallying to support their leader, I don't happen to see any Republicans out there condemning Bush for his lies. If you're on the same team, you're going to rally around a teammate. If the issue at hand is that Clinton lied under oath, while Bush was not under oath, that to me is a cop-out. A lie is a lie, no matter when it is told, and the cost of the one far outweighs the cost of the other. | | | If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield |
| | Registered: April 8, 2007 | | Posts: 1,057 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hi Guys,
Unicus - Perhaps I read your post before you edited it, anyway I did not see your apology until now. Wow! now I'm shoveling crap, I do not deserve, the attitude your taking. I've asked you to keep the conversation civil. So we will just agree that we disagree.
Take Care
Rico | | | If I felt any better I'd be sick!
Envy is mental theft. If you covet another mans possessions, then you should be willing to take on his responsibilities, heartaches, and troubles, along with his money. D. Koontz |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Cass:
You are missing one very cogent point about Clinton's lie(s). They were made under oath to a grand jury, if that were you or i that did that we would have served some time in the pokey. So in that contetx, yes it is important and will always be so.
Please don't start reciting the democrat talking points or slogans. Do you posess any evidence that George Bush lied or are you merely reciting 8 year old allegations that have never been proven, hmmmmcan anybody say Dan Rather....I knew that you could.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 4,596 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Danae Cassandra: Quote:
Now, cliche as this is, no one died when Clinton lied. Maybe, maybe not. I often wonder what Mr. Clinton's lie cost us in the moral corruption of our young people...afterall, it wasn't sex. I wonder how much of that non-sex led to non-pregnacies and non-abortions. At least President Bush had the support of congress, both Democrats and Republicans, when we invaded Iraq, as misguided as it may have been IMO. | | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Danae Cassandra: Quote:
Is it still so important that Clinton lied? He's a politician, of course he lied. What I've always thought was important isn't so much whether or not a politician is lying (it's a given) but what he's lying about. Clinton lied about having a sexual affair. Bush has lied about the reasons to go to war. Other current and previous politicians lied about a multitude of other things (including both sex and war).
Now, cliche as this is, no one died when Clinton lied. I'll take that lie any day over one that has cost the lives of over 4100 American soldiers and anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians (estimates vary that much, so I'll keep the range).
Finally, as for the Democrats rallying to support their leader, I don't happen to see any Republicans out there condemning Bush for his lies. If you're on the same team, you're going to rally around a teammate. If the issue at hand is that Clinton lied under oath, while Bush was not under oath, that to me is a cop-out. A lie is a lie, no matter when it is told, and the cost of the one far outweighs the cost of the other. First, Clinton did lie under oath. That makes it a crime. If it were anybody else, they would have gone to jail. Second, if Bush lied...which he didn't...so did the Clintons, Madeline Albright, Sandy Berger, Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Bob Graham and Al Gore. They all said the exact same thing. See hereand hereThe fact of the matter is, everybody had the same intelligence when they made the decision to invade Iraq. Everybody was on the same page. To say "Bush lied and people died," is ignoring the truth. Bush did not send troops to Iraq, congress did. Yes, it was at his request, but do you really believe that they simply 'took his word' for it? They believed, as he did, that the reason was valid. Had they found WMDs, they would have all taken credit for sending troops. If you believe otherwise, well, I don't know what else to say. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting Danae Cassandra:
Quote:
Is it still so important that Clinton lied? He's a politician, of course he lied. What I've always thought was important isn't so much whether or not a politician is lying (it's a given) but what he's lying about. Clinton lied about having a sexual affair. Bush has lied about the reasons to go to war. Other current and previous politicians lied about a multitude of other things (including both sex and war).
Now, cliche as this is, no one died when Clinton lied. I'll take that lie any day over one that has cost the lives of over 4100 American soldiers and anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians (estimates vary that much, so I'll keep the range).
Finally, as for the Democrats rallying to support their leader, I don't happen to see any Republicans out there condemning Bush for his lies. If you're on the same team, you're going to rally around a teammate. If the issue at hand is that Clinton lied under oath, while Bush was not under oath, that to me is a cop-out. A lie is a lie, no matter when it is told, and the cost of the one far outweighs the cost of the other.
First, Clinton did lie under oath. That makes it a crime. If it were anybody else, they would have gone to jail.
Second, if Bush lied...which he didn't...so did the Clintons, Madeline Albright, Sandy Berger, Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Bob Graham and Al Gore. They all said the exact same thing.
See here
and here
The fact of the matter is, everybody had the same intelligence when they made the decision to invade Iraq. Everybody was on the same page. To say "Bush lied and people died," is ignoring the truth. Bush did not send troops to Iraq, congress did. Yes, it was at his request, but do you really believe that they simply 'took his word' for it? They believed, as he did, that the reason was valid. Had they found WMDs, they would have all taken credit for sending troops. If you believe otherwise, well, I don't know what else to say. And nearly every intelligence agency in the world, including The Mossad. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
And nearly every intelligence agency in the world, including The Mossad. In the past, I have seen quotes from other world leaders that said the exact same thing, but that was more research than I was in the mood to do tonight.  | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1... 4 5 6 7 8 ...10 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |