29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzlessWhen asked for a reason why they voted it down this answer was given.....
I can't believe they did that. The Dow just dropped 800 points. The biggest ever loss.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080929/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown
""We're all worried about losing our jobs," Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. "Most of us say, 'I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it — not me.' " "
29 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirWhy are you laughing?
heheheheheheh
hope you don't have any money in the stock market shav. Or a pension that invests in the stock market. Or a national government pension fund designed as an old age security payment.
Because you just lost Billions out of those funds.
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzlessUMM, that guy voted FOR the bill and his comment was BEFORE the vote. So it was hardly a "reason why they voted it down".
When asked for a reason why they voted it down this answer was given.....
""We're all worried about losing our jobs," Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. "Most of us say, 'I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it — not me.' " "
The reason they voted it down is pretty simple; the people don't want it and there's an election in five weeks that everybody in the House's seat is up in. It is a democracy (kinda) you know.
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzlessStop being so hysterical; the market gyrates all the time. It went up over 800 last week when investors thought the bailout was a sure thing. This corrects back to where it should be.
Why are you laughing?
hope you don't have any money in the stock market shav. Or a pension that invests in the stock market. Or a national government pension fund designed as an old age security payment.
Because you just lost Billions out of those funds.
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzless"Mr. Bush had put the full weight of the White House behind the measure and had lobbied wavering Republicans in intensely personal telephone calls on Monday morning before the vote."
I can't believe they did that. The Dow just dropped 800 points. The biggest ever loss.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080929/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown
"The vote against the measure was 228 to 205, with 133 Republicans joining 95 Democrats in opposition. The bill was backed by 140 Democrats and 65 Republicans."
So despite the President's pleas, a FAR greater proportion of Reps voted against the bill than Dems.
Can you say, "we cannot get far enough away from our Party Leadership?"
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by no1marauderThis only helps long term investors. Try thinking about the people that have to take money out NOW ffs. Debt obligations, mortgage downpayments, mandatory RRSP conversion to RRIF's. Refinancing on your mortgage because your term is up. Actuary adjustment due to mandatory evaluations for pension funds.
Stop being so hysterical; the market gyrates all the time. It went up over 800 last week when investors thought the bailout was a sure thing. This corrects back to where it should be.
It's all fine and dandy if you dont' have to do any of this. Ok we get it. YOU AREN'T AFFECTED. Fine, but just because you aren't affected it doesn't mean millions worldwide aren't you airhead.
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzlessDude... I'm a communist.
Why are you laughing?
hope you don't have any money in the stock market shav. Or a pension that invests in the stock market. Or a national government pension fund designed as an old age security payment.
Because you just lost Billions out of those funds.
Why do you think I'm laughing?
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzlessShav will start whining when his ATM card won't work at the whorehouse.
Why are you laughing?
hope you don't have any money in the stock market shav. Or a pension that invests in the stock market. Or a national government pension fund designed as an old age security payment.
Because you just lost Billions out of those funds.
29 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderExactly ffs! They wanted to vote for it but were afraid they wouldn't get re-elected? Who's interest were they protecting? The country's or their own? Sometimes good leadership means doing things that aren't popular.
UMM, that guy voted FOR the bill and his comment was BEFORE the vote. So it was hardly a "reason why they voted it down".
The reason they voted it down is pretty simple; the people don't want it and there's an election in five weeks that everybody in the House's seat is up in. It is a democracy (kinda) you know.
From the NYTimes.
"Members of both parties, doing a quick political post-mortem, said those who voted no had encountered too much hostility for the bill among their constituents, and were worried that a vote in favor would be political suicide"
Originally posted by uzlessIf you invest in something as volatile in the short term as the stock market when you need money quickly, you are taking a risk. Most people with the type of assets and debt you are talking about, have diversified portfolios. If they don't, they made an error. I bet $50 on the Yankees to finish ahead of the Red Sox; when I lost I didn't cry for the government to bail me out. People who have a fair amount of assets and made bad bets will have to suck it up.
This only helps long term investors. Try thinking about the people that have to take money out NOW ffs. Debt obligations, mortgage downpayments, mandatory RRSP conversion to RRIF's. Refinancing on your mortgage because your term is up. Actuary adjustment due to mandatory evaluations for pension funds.
It's all fine and dandy if you dont' have to do an t just because you aren't affected it doesn't mean millions worldwide aren't you airhead.
29 Sep 08
Originally posted by uzlessThe US is a democracy. If the vast majority of people don't want something done, particularly when they and their children are going to be stuck with a huge bill for it, it shouldn't get done. Perhaps you'd prefer a dictatorship or monarchy or other aristocratic form of government where the elites get to decide what's good for the common people and just do it. That's usually what happens here anyway; but you have to at least lie to the people more convincingly than they did here and you really shouldn't schedule your fleecings of the people for right before an election.
Exactly ffs! They wanted to vote for it but were afraid they wouldn't get re-elected? Who's interest were they protecting? The country's or their own? Sometimes good leadership means doing things that aren't popular.
From the NYTimes.
"Members of both parties, doing a quick political post-mortem, said those who voted no had encountered too much h ...[text shortened]... mong their constituents, and were worried that a vote in favor would be political suicide"