Quantcast The Red and Black
College Media Network

The Red and Black

Search the Archives

 

Government shouldn't have to bail you out

Abstract:
This week the United States Congress is debating a mortgage bailout bill that will cost this nation more than $300 billion dollars. Although the bill is receiving widespread support, I wonder if it is because it is actually a worthwhile and cost-effective bill, or because it is an expensive boondoggle that legislators will be able to bring home to show voters in the November elections....

Khalil Ali

posted 6/26/08 @ 4:04 AM EST

$300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.
Post a reply to this comment

hmm

posted 6/26/08 @ 10:37 AM EST

Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 $300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.



Really, because McCain has come out in favor of a Balanced Budget Amendment, which would Constitutionally require the US to only spend what it brings in... just like states do.

McCain has also come out in favor of the line item veto, which would allow him to cut out unnecessary spending without killing a bill.

Obama has come out in favor of higher taxes on American corporations (those taxes are in turn passed on to the American consumer in the form of higher prices) and higher taxes on American investors. I wouldn't trust Obama with my economy. Just as much as I wouldn't trust him to recommend a good church to go to this Sunday.
Post a reply to this comment

Warnin

posted 6/26/08 @ 12:40 PM EST

Tread carefully or your student visa might be revoked and you would be forced to return to the hell hole you came from.
Post a reply to this comment

Khalil Ali

posted 6/26/08 @ 5:31 PM EST

Obama has recently said that he would actually look into cutting certain corporate tax rates. He never said he wanted to raise corporate tax rates, what he said was he wanted to close corporate tax loopholes, which I guess would result in corporations paying more taxes. But he also has said he might delay doing this depending on how the economy looks when he takes office. As for investors, those are only capital gains for people making over $250,000, but not below.

Also, Obama cuts taxes for 95% of Americans. And under Obama's plan, middle class families actually receive more tax relief thn under John McCain's tax plan. This is because Obama's tax cut plan is targeted more toward the middle class.

The thing is though, if we cut taxes even more than George Bush has and don't rescind t least some of the tax cuts, maybe for the richest Americans, and at the same time spend billions of dollars in Iraq, i don't see how that fixes or budget problem. But I'm glad he supports the balanced budget amendment.

We've trusted the republicans with the economy for the last eight years and we got deficits, a widening gap between rich and poor, rising college costs, rising food and gas prices, and millions loosing their health care. Its no wonder Obama has a double digit lead when it comes to the economy.
Post a reply to this comment

Brett Johnson

posted 6/27/08 @ 3:14 PM EST

Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 $300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.


someone needs to do their homework. as remarkable as it sounds, the gov't rakes in more money with lower taxes. capitalism is crazy. with lower taxes workers have more incentive because they keep more of their money. this creates savings, stability, and disposable income allowing these hard working americans the choice to spend unwisely or save as intelligent investors. lower taxes stimulate economic prosperity.

so why should those who are smart investors absorb the failures of americans who could not afford a house they signed a contract to buy. its their fault their house was repossessed. as unfortunate as it sounds, tragedy and hardship is part of living in a society where people control their own financial actions. not everyone invests safely or intelligently.

the true problem created in the housing market came as a result of the bush tax cuts but not for the reasons the liberal media voices claim. the bush tax cuts actually created a period of economic prosperity that gave americans more money than they new what to do with. many americans wanted a better house. to meet the demand builders began building and developing thousands and thousands of houses.

therefore with the supply oh houses so high the prices had to go down allowing many americans to buy more house than they thought they could afford several years before. the market, however, grew too fast leading to massive trickle down of unemployment in a couple of years. but with the boom of the housing market, mortgage companies began competing more and more to make money off of theses excited new families who really wanted to get into their new house. they signed into an adjustable rate mortgage that at the time was at rock bottom.

over the years the interest goes up and with it the minimum payments jump throwing off the budgets of these americans because when congress flipped from a republican majority to a democrat majority based on iraq rhetoric, america also got a more liberal socialistic economic policy which led to gov't overspending and economic stymie.

so really the layoffs and economic turmoil is a result of the housing market growing too quickly and democrats whining about iraq and not legislating ways to correct inflation and liberate the US from the strangle hold of foreign oil.

PS- when there is a problem with this country blame the 500 something politicians in the legislative branch that makes the policies we live by opposed to the man who gives a speech every once and a while.
Post a reply to this comment

zack b

posted 6/27/08 @ 3:14 PM EST

Why should the rich be taxed more than us? I guess your for obama. Yeah he has a good idea, tax the rich more and give free handouts to poor people. All that would do is lower salaries for the middle income earners? Why? who do you think pays all the middle earners salaries? thats right the High income earners. Your socialist.


Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 $300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.
Post a reply to this comment

Khalil Ali

posted 6/29/08 @ 3:54 AM EST

Way to name call, are you 5 years old. You must be a freshman. I'm obviously not a socialist, but I rather be that than a Bush apologist.

Has giving tax cuts improved our Budget situation for the last 8 years, no. And under Obama the middle class actually gets more tax relief than under McCain's plan. Its irresponsible to give the rich tax cuts when we are at war and have so much deficits.

No wonder more people say they trust Obama on the economy, b/c they have seen the last 8 years. Stop getting your talking points from sean hannity and rush limbaugh. I could have copied and pasted what your whole "redistribution and socialist" accusation I could have copied and pasted from rush's website. Its like you republicans all say the same thing. Amazing.
Post a reply to this comment

truth train

posted 7/01/08 @ 10:39 AM EST

Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 $300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.



Chugga chugga choo choo! Here's a little dose of truth for you.

The top 10% of earners in this country (thats folks making over 104,000 a year) pay over 70% of the taxes in this country. All these tax dollars are coming from the "evil rich"... why do you want to tax them even more?

Do you think its fair that 10% of the people in this country should pay 70% of the taxes. Most of their tax money is going to programs that they don't even use (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Public Housing, Food Stamps, Unemployment Checks, etc.)

Chugga Chugga Truuuuuth Truuuuuth!
Post a reply to this comment

Shadowrider

posted 7/03/08 @ 2:30 PM EST

Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 $300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.


I think the truth train is running over a few innocent people there. Of course the rich pay more in taxes...they have all the money. Look at Dick Grasso...$187.5 MILLION dollar pay package and you don't think he deserves to pay just a little more than the rest of us in taxes? The average American salary is no more than a rounding error compared to that and you want that he should pay the same taxes as the rest of us!?!?!?
Then look at capital gains and estate taxes. My waitress has to pay taxes on the measly tips she gets and the IRS goes to great lengths to make sure this happens. Capital gains and estate taxes, however, are sacred to right wingers. "If you make your money from oil futures or inherit it from daddy that shouldn't be touched. It would just ruin the economy!" Of course when they say things like that they mean their own personal economy, not that of working slobs.
As for bailing own homeowners, I didn't hear this level of right wing whining when the mortgage companies were getting bailed out. Again we were told it was essential for the economy. Now when they look at bailing out homeowners for the same reason it's just too expensive.

You right wing hypocrites make me sick.
Post a reply to this comment

zaid

posted 7/03/08 @ 6:33 PM EST

Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 $300 billion? Why not complain about the over $500 billion in Iraq? I'm not saying I disagree with your premise. I do think we should only help those who want to help themselves. And $300 billion does seem like a stretch.

But hey, don't blame only the Democrats. John McCain is proposing billions of dollars in tax cuts even for the richest Americans and he has no way to pay for it. He would add to our debt even more.




So wait... the rich deserve to pay even more in taxes because they work hard to earn money and pass it on to their kids?

This is why we need the fair tax.
Post a reply to this comment

Khalil Ali

posted 6/26/08 @ 4:10 AM EST

I just caught this- Liberals giving money they don't have!

Wasn't it George Bush who is borrowing money from the Chinese to pay for the war in Iraq! Wasn't it George Bush who is borrowing money to buy oil from the Saudis! At Least the last Democratic President we had actually balanced the budget. We are paying for a war with money we don't have because we are in a deficit.

George bush gave away millions of dollars in tax cuts to the oil companies and richest Americans in a time of war. Talk about giving away money irresponsibly with no plan to pay it back. Republicans have lost credibility when it comes to fiscal matters.
Post a reply to this comment

Brett Johnson

posted 6/28/08 @ 2:55 PM EST

Originally posted by

Khalil Ali

 I just caught this- Liberals giving money they don't have!

Wasn't it George Bush who is borrowing money from the Chinese to pay for the war in Iraq! Wasn't it George Bush who is borrowing money to buy oil from the Saudis! At Least the last Democratic President we had actually balanced the budget. We are paying for a war with money we don't have because we are in a deficit.

George bush gave away millions of dollars in tax cuts to the oil companies and richest Americans in a time of war. Talk about giving away money irresponsibly with no plan to pay it back. Republicans have lost credibility when it comes to fiscal
matters.


If you really think a president creates the budget, you need to go back to your high school political systems class. the budget, and therefore overspending, is created by the Congress. if the gov't only had to spend on the issues it was created to uphold in the Constitution rather than hardly meeting and appearing on cnn and the colbert report. over country's leaders should be arguing with each other every day or at least be doing some research to constantly improve the best country in the world. if we weren't such a generous country or a lazy people, maybe we would be in the black.
Post a reply to this comment

Ryan

posted 6/26/08 @ 10:34 AM EST

If we are going to bail out these people, then why not bail out people who spend too much on their credit cards and can't pay them off, or who bought gas-guzzling vehicles that now cost too much to drive?

The answer to this is actually not that complex. Our poor job market means that more people are projected to default on their homes in the future. This will further depress the home market and the value of most home owners' investment. A prudent prospective home buyer would sit it out and just wait and see how low the housing market can go. This too, will depress the value of most homes. A downward spiral in the housing market makes economic recovery as a whole more difficult.

Most people are not interested in taking some principled hands off, punish those debtors approach. They would just rather fix the economy ASAP. Bail outs of irresponsible businesses like Bear Sterns were part of that and so is this bail out.

It's the economy stupid.
Post a reply to this comment

Anon

posted 6/26/08 @ 11:17 AM EST

This isn't a bailout for homeowners, this is a bailout for banks that made horrid predatory loans. It's the banks and corporate execs that feel the entitlement, not the average Joe who got swindled by a greedy banker.

Nice try though.
Post a reply to this comment

jason

posted 7/02/08 @ 3:10 PM EST

Originally posted by

Anon

 This isn't a bailout for homeowners, this is a bailout for banks that made horrid predatory loans. It's the banks and corporate execs that feel the entitlement, not the average Joe who got swindled by a greedy banker.

Nice try though.


It's clear to anyone that these loans were a bad idea, no one that can read or even hear was "swindled." "Adjustable Rate Mortgage", it's all there in the title. I have no sympathy for the "average joe" that signed up for one of these. There were pages and pages of documentation that explained exactly what was gonna happen when they adjusted it.
Post a reply to this comment

Curious

posted 6/26/08 @ 1:48 PM EST

In regards to the opinion: "We all know that liberals like to give out money they don't have, but this is a stretch even by their standards" Please do temper this unsubstantiated generalization with the following facts – During the years that there was a Republican Executive and Legislative control the national debt increased from $5.7 trillion to $9.0 trillion. In addition, the debt increased from 35.1% to 37.9% of the GDP. I am not clear why you have not also addressed this 'conservative' spending issue. It is obvious who is most experienced at authorizing the handout of public money and it is not the 'liberals'. Liberals are often characterized as "Tax and Spend" but it appears the Bush administration and the Republican Congress deserve the characterization of "Spend and Borrow". Many so-called conservatives do not seem to be concerned about the current administration's activities that are effectively mortgaging our future financial stability.

In response to your concern to bailing out people that you have not met: ... do you refuse the government subsidy for your college education or did you blithely assume that the cost of tuition fully covered that expense? What about the government services provided by Clarke County ... would you be interested in paying the share otherwise paid by the property owners residing here? And for the millions of researchers, soldiers, police officers and volunteers who do not know you but work to enrich the quality of your life ... what do you say to them?
Post a reply to this comment

And you are?

posted 6/26/08 @ 3:53 PM EST

Originally posted by

Curious

 In regards to the opinion: "In response to your concern to bailing out people that you have not met: ... do you refuse the government subsidy for your college education or did you blithely assume that the cost of tuition fully covered that expense? What about the government services provided by Clarke County ... would you be interested in paying the share otherwise paid by the property owners residing here? And for the millions of researchers, soldiers, police officers and volunteers who do not know you but work to enrich the quality of your life ... what do you say to them?



Thank you so much for summing up my own opinions much more eloquently than I could have. If you don't believe the government exists to serve the people and help the misfortunate, then what the hell does it exist for? At the current time it looks like it exists to take my money, foolishly brandish it about, and ignore those in our own country who are in need. The government IS going to be bailing someone out here, whether it's bailing out the homeowner on the verge of foreclosure, or bailing out the irresponsible lenders who have a slough of unfulfilled notes on their hands after thousands of former homeowners just walk away. I don't know about you, but I would much rather help another struggling American just trying to make ends meet than some predator loan shark who tricked an ambitious homebuyer into a loan that they simply could not afford.

P.S. Greg Wilson- I see that you are a sophomore majoring in Political Science. Since you are quite cavalier in offering your own opinion as to how people should live their lives and manage their finances, here's an opinion for you: A nineteen year old attending this university due the HOPE scholarship has absolutely no business opining on subprime lending. Once you have a real job, and a family to support, I'd like to hear if you are still so arrogant about your position.
Post a reply to this comment

roflcer of the lawl

posted 6/26/08 @ 7:52 PM EST

Originally posted by

Curious
in response to your concern to bailing out people that you have not met: ... do you refuse the government subsidy for your college education or did you blithely assume that the cost of tuition fully covered that expense? What about the government services provided by Clarke County ... would you be interested in paying the share otherwise paid by the property owners residing here? And for the millions of researchers, soldiers, police officers and volunteers who do not know you but work to enrich the quality of your life ... what do you say to them?


What do you think the rent you pay for accommodations in Athens goes to? Just because you do not own property does not mean you don't pay your share of property taxes if you are living in an apartment. So in that respect Greg or any other student living in an apartment is entitled to the services provided by Athens-Clarke county. You're making quite a lot of assumptions in your reply.
Post a reply to this comment

Curious

posted 6/26/08 @ 10:10 PM EST

Perhaps you do not understand that the University is not on the tax rolls of Athens-Clarke county. The University has approximately 140 properties listed but all are tax exempt. For instance, the property just south of the Arches is just over 33 acres and and valued at $267 million. The University contributes no tax dollars for this property or any other in the county. I am thinking that the property tax contribution built into Mr. Wilson's rent is not an equitable tradeoff for the costs to support the University's infrastructure. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate all that the University has contributed to this community but I think that Mr. Wilson overstates his case that others are freeloading. We all are all interconnected and all of us have have received opportunities that we have not 'earned' through our own virtue. It wouldn't be ungracious to acknowledge this and understand that we are all in this together.
Post a reply to this comment

...

posted 6/27/08 @ 12:53 PM EST

Curious, I think I love you.
Post a reply to this comment

Chris

posted 6/27/08 @ 3:48 PM EST

Greg, I agree with your position that people should be more responsible and read things before they sign them. I do not know much about lending, so I must humbly say there may be fault on the banks as well. I simply don't know.

But I think the real error you make in this piece is pointing fingers at "liberals". I understand that liberals do like to spend money they don't have. But conservatives do, too. It isn't a political spectrum thing - it's a politician thing to do.

Your articles are well-written, in the sense that they clearly demonstrate your points, and I sometimes agree with you, but your sly comments and far too generalized finger-pointing are out of place.
Post a reply to this comment

Jeff

posted 6/28/08 @ 4:50 PM EST

"Why should I have to help bail out someone that I have never met and will most likely never meet, and who lives on the other side of the U.S.?"

Get a grip, dude. You're not bailing anyone out. This comment epitomizes myopic selfishness. We shouldn't be bailing anyone out of this mess, but not because the person being helped isn't you! Leave the parents' house sometime and travel. Go volunteer some time for a community organization. Do these things until you finally realize that the picture is far bigger than you and your two parents.

As for the "liberals" spending comment, it speaks for itself to anyone who's actually paid attention to our government and its budget for more than the past 7 years. Since you haven't, I'll point out to you that when this nation was governed by a Democratic president and Democratic congress, the deficit was on its way to being paid off within 10 years. That all changed when the pendulum swung the other way and we ended up with a Republican president wielding absolute power.

Furthermore, if you understood what the term "liberal" meant, even its special meaning within a political context, you wouldn't use it the way you did in that paragraph. Neither would the anchors on Fox News, or Glen Beck. Instead, you use the term "liberal" to refer to any member of the Democratic party, which you hate by virtue of the fact that its not the Republican party. Furthermore, you use the term exclusively to refer to Democrats, ignoring the fact that hundreds of Republican party lawmakers would most properly be categorized as "liberal."

Want to shut up until you know what you're talking about now, Mr. Wilson?
Post a reply to this comment

Zaid

posted 6/29/08 @ 3:39 AM EST

Government bailed out a single entity -- Bear Sterns -- for tens of billions of dollars recently, and there was almost no outcry for the political class.

Why?

Because Wall Street is a gigantic donor to the capitol, and while Americans who are being screwed over by speculators and an artificial bubble are being thrown out of their homes by this recession, we're spending money we don't have to bail out executives who happen to bribe enough Republicans and Democrats to take care of them.

Capitalism for the working man, socialism for the rich -- that's America for you.
Post a reply to this comment

Zaid

posted 6/29/08 @ 3:42 AM EST

And it's terrible economic sense to believe that not working against a forclosure crisis will be good for the economy. How is people out of their homes, unable to work good for the economy? We need as many healthy, productive people as possible.

Things don't just "take care of themselves," as far as market self-correct. That's where bubbles come from in the first place. I can't think of a single country that wouldn't take corrective actions during recessions and bursting bubbles; no country is that reliant on an idiotic herd of global investors.

As for the "sense of entitlement" -- no, it's a "sense of democracy." In a country you use the power of your vote to mobilize the goverment to take care of social concerns. This isn't some kind of radical idea that George Soros and Michael Moore came up with in recent years, its part of basic social contract theory for the past century. The only countries in the world that don't have social and economic justice at the root of their social contracts are failed states -- Somalia or Haiti.
Post a reply to this comment

Tony Soprano

posted 6/29/08 @ 3:19 PM EST

Great Article....very objective....

If you followed the news, you would know that most people didn't just go out and sign for loans they couldn't afford. Rather, the loan companies were shoving bad loan after bad loan into the consumers mouths. Most people who buy homes aren't well versed in finance, and they rely on the loan officers to steer them the right way. When these officers take advantage of consumers, it isn't the consumers fault but rather your very beloved companies who can do no harm that are to blame.

How did this get published? is the editor on vacation or something
Post a reply to this comment

Stacie Austin, and I hope this changes your mind.

posted 6/30/08 @ 1:44 AM EST

I cringed as soon as I saw who had written this article, as I was brought back to the close-minded and poorly written, uneducated article about sex ed in schools that he had written in the past.

You are a political science major and you make comments like these, "Why should I have to help bail out someone that I have never met and will most likely never meet, and who lives on the other side of the U.S.?"?

Seriously, you are so damn closed minded that it is disgusting.

First of all, that comment was so selfish, ignorant, and the fact that you are still a political science major blows my mind.

I guess you wouldn't have helped the victims of 9/11, or Katrina, nor would you even offer aid to a family who is living off one income due to the economy struggles, because simply, "you do not know them."

Realize that there are children, widows, elderly parents, and other people who may rely on the income of someone who may be, in your terms, "careless."

You seem to believe that the only people who get support from the government are the ones who abuse it.

Heartless.

First of all,I will be humble enough to share this with you.
I come from a family that was making a substantial amount of money from my father's income, and as the economy got harder, and as companies started to downsize, my dad lost his job of nearly 30 years. Our family needs the help now, and we live in a house, have bills, has two daughters in college, have medical expenses beyond our control, and many of this was decided while my dad still had a "stable" income. Because my father lost his job, we are just getting by, and no, my father did not take out some loan that he couldn't afford, nor was he careless in his financial decisions, and one day, just one day, we may very well need the government's help in getting on our feet.

However, because of close minded, self absorbed written articles such as this, I really am worried about the future of our government (as if I am not already worried enough), and how much help we may be able to get if that time does come.

You know, I hope you have a humbling experience that is out of your control, such as losing your home, losing your financial security, or that you one day can not rely on your mommy or daddy for money, so that you may realize that there is good in the government helping people out.

Yes, when the government decides to help people out, ones that they don't even know, on the other side of the country, blah blah b.s., they will indeed help those who abuse the program as well. You should know that already as a political science major.

You have a long road to go my friend, and just because you're a political science major, don't believe that you can already start ranting off this outrageous articles and support them with the most uneducated statements (such as your whiny, "I don't know them blah blah boo hoo" comment) and believe that you are any where near a correct statement or article.

Consider yourself lucky, as some of us do not know where our next meal may come from, all because of a sudden loss in financial security (and not your highly believed abuse of credit cards and loans)


Sincerely,
someone you have never met, you will never meet, on the other side of the world as far as you are concerned, and may one day rely on the government because of problems OUT of my control

Stacie
Post a reply to this comment

RP

posted 7/02/08 @ 10:35 AM EST

I think I may be in love with this comment....


Originally posted by

Stacie Austin, and I hope this changes your mind.

 I cringed as soon as I saw who had written this article, as I was brought back to the close-minded and poorly written, uneducated article about sex ed in schools that he had written in the past.

You are a political science major and you make comments like these, "Why should I have to help bail out someone that I have never met and will most likely never meet, and who lives on the other side of the U.S.?"?

Seriously, you are so damn closed minded that it is disgusting.

First of all, that comment was so selfish, ignorant, and the fact that you are still a political science major blows my mind.

I guess you wouldn't have helped the victims of 9/11, or Katrina, nor would you even offer aid to a family who is living off one income due to the economy struggles, because simply, "you do not know them."

Realize that there are children, widows, elderly parents, and other people who may rely on the income of someone who may be, in your terms, "careless."

You seem to believe that the only people who get support from the government are the ones who abuse it.

Heartless.

First of all,I will be humble enough to share this with you.
I come from a family that was making a substantial amount of money from my father's income, and as the economy got harder, and as companies started to downsize, my dad lost his job of nearly 30 years. Our family needs the help now, and we live in a house, have bills, has two daughters in college, have medical expenses beyond our control, and many of this was decided while my dad still had a "stable" income. Because my father lost his job, we are just getting by, and no, my father did not take out some loan that he couldn't afford, nor was he careless in his financial decisions, and one day, just one day, we may very well need the government's help in getting on our feet.

However, because of close minded, self absorbed written articles such as this, I really am worried about the future of our government (as if I am not already worried enough), and how much help we may be able to get if that time does come.

You know, I hope you have a humbling experience that is out of your control, such as losing your home, losing your financial security, or that you one day can not rely on your mommy or daddy for money, so that you may realize that there is good in the government helping people out.

Yes, when the government decides to help people out, ones that they don't even know, on the other side of the country, blah blah b.s., they will indeed help those who abuse the program as well. You should know that already as a political science major.

You have a long road to go my friend, and just because you're a political science major, don't believe that you can already start ranting off this outrageous articles and support them with the most uneducated statements (such as your whiny, "I don't know them blah blah boo hoo" comment) and believe that you are any where near a correct statement or article.

Consider yourself lucky, as some of us do not know where our next meal may come from, all because of a sudden loss in financial security (and not your highly believed abuse of credit cards and loans)


Sincerely,
someone you have never met, you will never meet, on the other side of the world as far as you are concerned, and may one day rely on the government because of problems OUT of my control

Stacie
Post a reply to this comment

Stacie Austin

posted 6/30/08 @ 1:47 AM EST

By the way, you are hardly a sophomore, and if I remember correctly, you were a freshman this past spring when you wrote that article about sex education/abstinence.

Please humor me with what political science classes you have already taken that have challenged your way of thinking.
Post a reply to this comment

Stacie

posted 6/30/08 @ 2:02 AM EST

for any grammar police out there

we HAVE two daughters in college
:)
Post a reply to this comment

dumbass

posted 6/30/08 @ 2:12 AM EST

People lose money or even their entire retirement funds through investing every week. Does that mean the government should bail them out because they made bad choices?

Or death in family, lost incomes, medical crisis such as cancer, leukemia, etc.

We just put my grandmother in a nursing home, and guess what Gregory. The government is paying for it *evil laugh*

If you knew anything though, you might want to know that my grandfather passed away after a bout of cancer, and had little money to leave my grandmother. With his death, also went her insurance.

Why don't you also enlighten us on your plan of action for lowering gas prices.
Post a reply to this comment

Stacie Austin

posted 6/30/08 @ 2:25 AM EST

Ha!


In response to this article, and your previous articles about the election in November, I must remind you of McCain's "Liberal" record.

And I challenge you to write your next article without writing liberal once, and then we can count on not seeing any more close minded articles.


In a more encouraging light,
you are still young and thankfully, impressionable. Be open to challenging thoughts in your future, much more challenging political science classes, and never be afraid to go against the views of mommy and daddy.

You'll be there one day Mr. Wilson..

one day
Post a reply to this comment

a

posted 6/30/08 @ 7:01 AM EST

Y'know, I kind of doubt it. He looks like a spoiled, pampered little shitass to me.
Post a reply to this comment

Stacie...again

posted 6/30/08 @ 10:53 AM EST

I must mention though, most of my rant was not so much about the housing bill itself, but the attitude of the writer.
Post a reply to this comment

Kim

posted 6/30/08 @ 1:31 PM EST

Totally and fully agree. People must stop xomplaining about the war in Iraq yes its costing us billions so the answer to that is a little more won't hurt?
Post a reply to this comment

FORMER UGA

posted 6/30/08 @ 1:49 PM EST

Good article, well written. I am in agreement.
Post a reply to this comment

Not

posted 6/30/08 @ 2:02 PM EST

Originally posted by

FORMER UGA

 Good article, well written. I am in agreement.



Whether you agree or not is not in question; however, this article is FAR from well written.

Do you think his comment about not helping those he does not know is a supportive argument, no?

This article is not good journalism or near it even.
And likely, this is Wilson, so quit replying to your own article dumbass.
Post a reply to this comment

Dawggone

posted 6/30/08 @ 2:54 PM EST

Many of these comments are great examples of how the "tolerant" left is only tolerant of those that agree with them. An attack on the writer is not a pursuasive argument. And remember, Mr. wilson is a sophomore. He is learning to write and develop his own ideas; which is the part of college experience.
I bet if the article was yet another rant about Bush or Cheney or a column heaping praise on Obama many of you would have wet yourself. The whole point (and beauty) of a democracy is the free exchange of ideas and their influence on who is chosen to govern. Just because you dont agree is not a license to attack the speaker.
It is also funny how those that accuse Mr. Wilson of essentially quoting Limbaugh or O'Reilly sound alot like Keith Olberman and his cohorts. Maybe it is not that he is incapable of developing his own beliefs as many seem to suggest, but that he agrees with conservatives.
Post a reply to this comment

Ryan

posted 6/30/08 @ 4:02 PM EST

"Many of these comments are great examples of how the "tolerant" left is only tolerant of those that agree with them."

Yeah, seriously! To all you people out there who disagree with the author of this column: you better get with the program and start tolerating his beliefs. The sooner you all learn that the internet is always a polite place and that arguing is strictly forbidden; the sooner I can stop keeping a box of tissues by my computer!
Post a reply to this comment

Dawggone

posted 6/30/08 @ 4:31 PM EST

Originally posted by

Ryan

 "Many of these comments are great examples of how the "tolerant" left is only tolerant of those that agree with them."

Yeah, seriously! To all you people out there who disagree with the author of this column: you better get with the program and start tolerating his beliefs. The sooner you all learn that the internet is always a polite place and that arguing is strictly forbidden; the sooner I can stop keeping a box of tissues by my computer!


I doubt the tissues are for tears.
Post a reply to this comment

stacie

posted 6/30/08 @ 7:14 PM EST

I don't disagree with his opinion on spending money on people who carelessly abuse their credit and loans, but the way that he supports his argument are very insensitive and are not strong arguments.

Just because you will never see someone or meet someone is not a good excuse for why you won't help them.

I'm moderate in my views, and as of now (at least not until more research and debates are done), I wouldn't vote for Obama or McCain, but he needs to back up his articles with better reasons to do or not do something.

That isn't hard at all.
Post a reply to this comment

zaid

posted 6/30/08 @ 8:56 PM EST

"someone needs to do their homework. as remarkable as it sounds, the gov't rakes in more money with lower taxes"

This is the "Laffer Curve" and it has never ever been proven; even the head of the Econ department here who is very right-wing, a Friedmanite, doesn't agree with your statement.
Post a reply to this comment

Ryan

posted 6/30/08 @ 11:18 PM EST

"I doubt the tissues are for tears."

LoL, caught red handed ^^
Post a reply to this comment

a

posted 7/01/08 @ 2:35 AM EST

You want an argument as to the "points" made? Cool. Just don't trot out this "he's only a sophomore" bullshit.

We all know that liberals like to give out money they don't have, but this is a stretch even by their standards.

Yes. We do all know this. They give out this money to a President who lied us into an illegal and unnecessary war our children will be repaying the Chinese for twenty years from now. Of course, they didn't control Congress until '06, so go figure.


But hey, when you are planning to spend $300 billion you don't already have on something, what is a couple extra billion more?

Ask this of Bush re: Iraq and then get back to us. Until then, you got nothing. And where did the cash we sent to Pakistan go? You can't tell me because you don't know. No one does. Is throwing cash into the wind in a foreign land preferable to doing so here? If so, why?


Why should I have to help bail out someone that I have never met and will most likely never meet, and who lives on the other side of the U.S.?

Because you are, for better or worse, an American. You are free to renounce your citizenship if you find this too onerous a burden. Citizenship entails duties and responsibilities as well as rights and privileges. Don't be a goddamn shirker. It's unbecoming and a sign of poor character and retarded moral development.


Liberals have fostered a sense of entitlement among many Americans, to which the idea of personal responsibility is sacrilege. Buying a home is an investment, many times the largest investment families make, but we have to remember that with any investment comes risk.

I thought Bush was behind the 'Ownership Society'. If I somehow got him mixed up with Cynthia McKinney, I apologize.


there are many better ways to go about this

Name some. Get specific. Outline a viable alternative. Make me believe you aren't simply gainsaying a politician with whom you disagree. I bet you can't. I bet you have no alternative plan in mind.

At least in this column, you've spooned your opinions out of the dirty diaper that is AM talk radio and slurped heartily and loudly. Please don't do that again.
Post a reply to this comment

Zaid

posted 7/01/08 @ 3:25 AM EST

Originally posted by

a

 You want an argument as to the "points" made? Cool. Just don't trot out this "he's only a sophomore" bullshit.

We all know that liberals like to give out money they don't have, but this is a stretch even by their standards.

Yes. We do all know this. They give out this money to a President who lied us into an illegal and unnecessary war our children will be repaying the Chinese for twenty years from now. Of course, they didn't control Congress until '06, so go figure.


But hey, when you are planning to spend $300 billion you don't already have on something, what is a couple extra billion more?

Ask this of Bush re: Iraq and then get back to us. Until then, you got nothing. And where did the cash we sent to Pakistan go? You can't tell me because you don't know. No one does. Is throwing cash into the wind in a foreign land preferable to doing so here? If so, why?


Why should I have to help bail out someone that I have never met and will most likely never meet, and who lives on the other side of the U.S.?

Because you are, for better or worse, an American. You are free to renounce your citizenship if you find this too onerous a burden. Citizenship entails duties and responsibilities as well as rights and privileges. Don't be a goddamn shirker. It's unbecoming and a sign of poor character and retarded moral development.


Liberals have fostered a sense of entitlement among many Americans, to which the idea of personal responsibility is sacrilege. Buying a home is an investment, many times the largest investment families make, but we have to remember that with any investment comes risk.

I thought Bush was behind the 'Ownership Society'. If I somehow got him mixed up with Cynthia McKinney, I apologize.


there are many better ways to go about this

Name some. Get specific. Outline a viable alternative. Make me believe you aren't simply gainsaying a politician with whom you disagree. I bet you can't. I bet you have no alternative plan in mind.

At least in this column, you've spooned your opinions out of the dirty diaper that is AM talk radio and slurped heartily and loudly. Please don't do that again.



I think you really touched on the crux of the argument here. I know Greg, and I know he's a big fan of Ayn Rand (minus the atheism because he wants to get his afterlife on).

The far right wants to dissolve the bonds between people and country -- you have no responsibility to your fellow countrymen, to the pregnant widow on the other side of the street. You're on your own (except when it comes to war, then everyone line up and kill the people on the other side of the pond!).

It's a very lethal form of thinking, and it's probably the reason Americans are much less happy as a whole than many in the developing world because this on-your-own-so-screw-you philosophy has had so much permeance here in atomizing people.

But like I mentioned before, I saw little criticism in Greg's piece about the bailout of the credit industry, big lenders, bankers, that has happened repeatedly over the past few decades. I guess that's just not in the talking points he gets from the people he has worked for (the Guarddawg, Congressmen, etc.).
Post a reply to this comment

Stacie

posted 7/01/08 @ 5:13 PM EST

Finally, arguments that don't sound heartless, uneducated/unresearched, and the typical extremely right-winged egotistical conservative.

I don't mind someone's position on an issue, but just make sure you know why you are there, and not just because "you are helping someone you may never meet"

Wilson, if this is your case, then you might want to argue paying taxes at all, and you might also want to quit taking HOPE scholarship from the GA lottery.

Afterall, that might be money you receive from someone who you will never meet.

Give writing a break, crack open and book, and come back to us when you can argue any point, outrageous or not, legitimately and with a strong voice.
Post a reply to this comment

stacie

posted 7/01/08 @ 8:38 PM EST

Originally posted by

Stacie

 Finally, arguments that don't sound heartless, uneducated/unresearched, and the typical extremely right-winged egotistical conservative.

I don't mind someone's position on an issue, but just make sure you know why you are there, and not just because "you are helping someone you may never meet"

Wilson, if this is your case, then you might want to argue paying taxes at all, and you might also want to quit taking HOPE scholarship from the GA lottery.

After all, that might be money you receive from someone who you will never meet.

Give writing a break, crack open and book, and come back to us when you can argue any point, outrageous or not, legitimately and with a strong voice.


hah, "crack open a book"
:)
Post a reply to this comment

Dawggone

posted 7/02/08 @ 4:24 PM EST

Originally posted by

Stacie

 Finally, arguments that don't sound heartless, uneducated/unresearched, and the typical extremely right-winged egotistical conservative.

I don't mind someone's position on an issue, but just make sure you know why you are there, and not just because "you are helping someone you may never meet"

Wilson, if this is your case, then you might want to argue paying taxes at all, and you might also want to quit taking HOPE scholarship from the GA lottery.

Afterall, that might be money you receive from someone who you will never meet.

Give writing a break, crack open and book, and come back to us when you can argue any point, outrageous or not, legitimately and with a strong voice.


By "crack open a book" you must mean a book that you agree with. That is a classic liberal attack on any conservative argument. Just call him ignorant or biased or elitist or whatever and his argument is shot. OOPS I said shot, I must be a gun nut so Im disqualified from commenting as well.

P.S. The Hope Scholarship is funded by a lottery that people VOLUNTARILY play so that is not at all like using public tax dollars to bail out people who made bad fiscal choices.
Post a reply to this comment

stacie

posted 7/02/08 @ 5:55 PM EST

Originally posted by

Stacie

 Finally, arguments that don't sound heartless, uneducated/unresearched, and the typical extremely right-winged egotistical conservative.

I don't mind someone's position on an issue, but just make sure you know why you are there, and not just because "you are helping someone you may never meet"

Wilson, if this is your case, then you might want to argue paying taxes at all, and you might also want to quit taking HOPE scholarship from the GA lottery.

Afterall, that might be money you receive from someone who you will never meet.

Give writing a break, crack open and book, and come back to us when you can argue any point, outrageous or not, legitimately and with a strong voice.


By cracking open a book, that is not what I mean.

Call me liberal if you want, but I would refer to myself as moderate, thanks though for assuming.

He does not have to agree with me. He just needs to argue his point without such dumb statements like "why should I help anyone I will never meet"

That is all.
Thanks.
Post a reply to this comment

stacie

posted 7/02/08 @ 5:57 PM EST

Originally posted by

Stacie

 Finally, arguments that don't sound heartless, uneducated/unresearched, and the typical extremely right-winged egotistical conservative.

I don't mind someone's position on an issue, but just make sure you know why you are there, and not just because "you are helping someone you may never meet"

Wilson, if this is your case, then you might want to argue paying taxes at all, and you might also want to quit taking HOPE scholarship from the GA lottery.

Afterall, that might be money you receive from someone who you will never meet.

Give writing a break, crack open and book, and come back to us when you can argue any point, outrageous or not, legitimately and with a strong voice.


Just because I disagree doesn't make me liberal.

Find out who I am before posting, and then you might feel stupid for calling me "liberal"

Sincerely,
someone who is for carrying concealed weapons, against abortion, and against public health care.

Thanks, stupid.
Post a reply to this comment

zaid

posted 7/03/08 @ 3:16 AM EST

Originally posted by

Stacie

 Finally, arguments that don't sound heartless, uneducated/unresearched, and the typical extremely right-winged egotistical conservative.

I don't mind someone's position on an issue, but just make sure you know why you are there, and not just because "you are helping someone you may never meet"

Wilson, if this is your case, then you might want to argue paying taxes at all, and you might also want to quit taking HOPE scholarship from the GA lottery.

Afterall, that might be money you receive from someone who you will never meet.

Give writing a break, crack open and book, and come back to us when you can argue any point, outrageous or not, legitimately and with a strong voice.


People "VOLUNTARILY" pay all taxes; I don't remember you not having the right to move out of the country if you hold 19th century ethics and don't understand what "social contract" means.
Post a reply to this comment

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

 

 

Advertisement

Poll

Hmm, what to make of Kentucky vs. Georgia:
Submit Vote

View Results



Advertisement