Why don't politicians look at history before they open their mouths?

It is a FACT that the rich have done MUCH better than the rest of the country during the last 10 years. One of the largest problems we have as a country is energy, and the problem is that we have not nationalized the oil wells that are not being used, and subsidized energy. This is exactly what they do in foreign countries, and something that we could do here saving Americans BILLIONS on their energy cost. But, big oil OWNS Washington, and this will NEVER happen.

Ok Andy lets play the who had a better economy game. Would you say George W. Bush, or Bill Clinton? Would you say Ronald Reagan, or George H. W. Bush? When you find the answers you will see my FACTS are right!!!!!

Andy, I understand what you are saying, but if it only happened once than you could say that, but there is pattern here that is plain as day. When Reagan and Clinton raise certain taxes they were able to lower other taxes which helped the country. Bush jr. and Obama have focused 100% on tax cuts and the economy has suffered. You bring up sub-prime loans, which were pushed during the Clinton era, and the Bush area. But, what caused the housing crash was NOT what Clinton did but what the republicans in congress did by eliminating Glass-Steagall. This allowed banks to be on both sides of a transaction thus they could making huge profits, but also lose huge amounts of money. The other thing that caused this crisis was the over usage of insurance on mortgages by the banks. What a bank would do is insure the mortgages that they were under writing so if there was a default their liability would only be 10% on average. So if you write a mortgage for $100,000 your insured liability is only $10,000, unless the insurer (AIG) goes under (ever wonder why AIG was bailed out?). I wish more people would take the time and UNDERSTAND facts instead of saying: I know everything, you know nothing...I win!!! If you research these things, and listen to other points of view you MIGHT learn something, but I am not holding my breathe Andy!!!!!!!!!!!!

So correlation equals causation? You know the sun came up 365 times a year for 8 years, when Bush was in office. I'm not sure Obama can boast that record. Of course I'm being absurd, because merely saying that A happened, and B happened, thus A caused B, is idiotic and stupid. Which means that obviously Clinton was responsible for every good thing in the 90s, simply because he was in office during the 90s. The fact is, if you look at sub-prime loans, and when they really started taking off, it started in 1997, when Clinton pushed for more sub-prime loans, through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yet the crash didn't happen until 2008. The long term effects of legislation, whether positive, or negative, can take many years to show up, and sometimes they can occur quickly. This is why if you want to really make logical legitimate statements, you need to think more rationally about the issue, and evidence. This brainless non-thought out "economy good... Clinton pres... Clinton = good econ! I r smrt!" crap is getting old. I wish more people would use their brains and think more.

Bob, I hate to tell you this but people with tattoos and Body piercings can be poor. There is some overlapping in programs that should be addressed, but some of these programs are set up to guarantee that kids are being taken care of. I also understand that you can use food stamps on numerous items including fast food, but it all depends on how mush pull the fast food lobby has on your state, or if one of the leaders in your state is franchisee of a fast food company (god forbid there be corruption in state government!!!). You can see where the system can be gamed, but you also have to look at why it is allowed to be gamed. Is it loop holes that need to closed, or politicians that need to be investigated?

X, here is the link where Ron Paul says that we should just let the $1.2 TRILLION in cuts go through and be done with it. Those cuts would be made in entitlements like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, along with defense and other spending. http://www.cnbc.com/id/45311022 I have said before that there are things that I do like about Paul, but other things that I don't like at all. Ending TSA and putting it in the hands of private companies would NOT be the best thing for the country seeing how some airports would have better security than others, but how do you know what airports are better than others? And, are you going to see airports not allow planes at certain airports because of their lack of security? Putting Medicaid in the hands of the states is just pawning off that that responsibility on to the states. I would like to know how he says that Medicaid will continue to service people if the states can choose who gets it and who doesn't. "Block grants Medicaid and other welfare programs to allow States the flexibility and ingenuity they need to solve their own unique problems without harming those currently relying on the programs." "Which "rich people" would those be? " Find me someone in congress that YOU would consider "middle class"? How about find me someone in congress that WOULDN'T be effected by a raise in the highest income bracket? If they increase the tax rate on the top bracket it would be a decrease in EVERY wages for every congressmen and women in Washington, and the one thing we all know with 100% certainty is that congress DOESN'T lower THEIR wages PERIOD!!!

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=258&Itemid=60 HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE September 10, 2003. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Subsidies Distort the Housing Market Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on the Treasury Department’s views regarding government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for taking time out of their busy schedules to appear before the committee. I hope this committee spends some time examining the special privileges provided to GSEs by the federal government. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received 13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone. Today, I will introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act, which removes government subsidies from the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and the National Home Loan Bank Board. One of the major government privileges granted to GSEs is a line of credit with the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion dollars. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps the GSEs attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the government to engage in a huge unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt. The Free Housing Market Enhancement Act also repeals the explicit grant of legal authority given to the Federal Reserve to purchase GSE debt. GSEs are the only institutions besides the United States Treasury granted explicit statutory authority to monetize their debt through the Federal Reserve. This provision gives the GSEs a source of liquidity unavailable to their competitors. The connection between the GSEs and the government helps isolate the GSE management from market discipline. This isolation from market discipline is the root cause of the recent reports of mismanagement occurring at Fannie and Freddie. After all, if Fannie and Freddie were not underwritten by the federal government, investors would demand Fannie and Freddie provide assurance that they follow accepted management and accounting practices. Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges granted to Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans. Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government’s interference in the housing market, the government’s policy of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing. Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary, but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts. No less an authority than Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has expressed concern that government subsidies provided to GSEs make investors underestimate the risk of investing in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Mr. Chairman, I would like to once again thank the Financial Services Committee for holding this hearing. I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for their presence here today. I hope today’s hearing sheds light on how special privileges granted to GSEs distort the housing market and endanger American taxpayers. Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope this committee will soon stand up for American taxpayers and investors by acting on my Free Housing Market Enhancement Act.

We had 8 years of Bush, and the country almost blew up!!!!! Last time I check Bush left office during the worst economic period since the great depression. Funny how no other republican is running on that Bush platform isn't it?