In reply to the concerns you raised.
Posted By: see message on 2008-09-04
In Reply to: What issues matter to you? (no flaming please!) - Emily Ayn
My first reaction when reading your post was one of curiosity. I was an IC during the latter Clinton years and I do not recall paying 40% of my earnings to tax. What I remember was an aggregate tax payment composed of income tax, social security tax and self-employment tax, which essentially represented a burden I shouldered as an IC that compensated for the lack of employer contribution to SS, Medicare and FICA. To my knowledge, this tax structure has not changed since then for ICs. I also remember paying my taxes quarterly, and being responsible for calculating enough tax not only to cover my required amounts, but also to pay in extra each time if I wanted to generate a return at the end of the year. I made a decision NOT to be an independent contractor because I was a single parent with a mortgage. The self-employment levy felt like double tax to me as compared to what I had been accustomed to as an employee and, most definitely the total percentage of tax burden as an IC was greater than that of a full employee status.
On checking my returns from those years (which I still keep in the house) I find the total tax burden I had for all the components of my tax liability amounted to 27%. I am wondering if you did not get a return back then because you did not contribute more than the minimum rate during the course of the year and that later on, your contributions did allow you to have a return. Also, to account for the lower rate during Bush years, did your family situation change between Clinton years and Bush years, did you get married, have children, add an earned income tax credit deduction, add dependents, start itemizing your taxes. All these changes would account for a lower percentage rate of your tax liability, thus allowing for a return.
I am also wondering why you would look back instead of forward when assessing the issue of whether or not you will be "taxed more." Have you read Obama's tax plan? If not, please go to this link and take a look. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#tax-relief
Essentially this is what you will find (please excuse the format challenges of cut and paste).
Provide Middle Class Americans Tax Relief
Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they pay.
• Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.
• Eliminate Income Taxes for Seniors Making Less than $50,000: Barack Obama will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This proposal will eliminate income taxes for 7 million seniors and provide these seniors with an average savings of $1,400 each year. Under the Obama plan, 27 million American seniors will also not need to file an income tax return.
• Simplify Tax Filings for Middle Class Americans: Obama will dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes. Obama will ensure that the IRS uses the information it already gets from banks and employers to give taxpayers the option of pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Experts estimate that the Obama proposal will save Americans up to 200 million total hours of work and aggravation and up to $2 billion in tax preparer fees.
It also might be worthwhile to check out the plan on the economy here
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
Scroll down to At a Glance and browse the links of interest to you.
Here's the link for healthcare
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
Again, scroll down to At a Glance and select links of interest.
I have provided Obama website links because you expressed doubts about democratic policy. McCain's website also should have similar information available on these issues as well for your comparison. After reviewing the information (if you were not already familiar with it), ask yourself where the information is coming from that is making you fearful that your taxes will be raised. I would really be interested in any response you may feel inclined to post in this regard. On a personal note, I will not be trusting McCain with the economy or with handling my HARD EARNED tax money. I do NOT want one more single penny to be used to fund the war, bankroll Israel's apartheid and nuclear weapons arsenal, prop up our struggling corporations or trickle up into the pockets of the richest among us in the form of continued Bush tax cuts to the rich, which McCain has openly stated he will continue if elected.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Yep. I have my concerns too. But....
he is the master of his own destiny...and we shall see where he attempts to take us.
What concerns me...... sm
is not so much whether or not I can survive the high bills. Of course, I am concerned for my kids, but I am really concerned about the elderly in the cities where they depend on electricity to heat their homes in the winter and cool their homes in the summer. The extreme temperatures are hard on the elderly.
Offshore concerns
To follow is a post on today's MTS Main board under off shore concerns/mg. Maybe some of you could help her out.
I mentioned this a few messages below, but the blog has its first post. I am NOT supporting any Ad things on there and will not be making anything off this.
http://violatingamerica.blogspot.com/
If you have a link that would be useful to others to write their gov't reps, companies, news sources, etc, feel free to post them or e-mail me so i can get them up there. I am also looking for any news stories or any information we can get. One way or the other, we might be able to make a difference.
The OP brought up her concerns....
I brought up mine. I find mine more concerning than hers. And I don't understand why Democrats accept certain behavior in their own and lamblast the other side for the same perceived weaknesses. Why is that?
I do think these are valid concerns...(sm)
and ones that have to be addressed. However, I don't see anything wrong with setting a goal, which is what Obama has done by saying it should be closed in 1 year. I think he purposely left himself some leeway by saying a year, and at the same time let people like me who support him that it will get done.
Personally I think they should be tried in a military court, which would avoid a lot of the bureaucracy that is associated with the regular US court system. They may want to go by the world court rules when trying them? You're right. Noone knows exactly how this is going to be done yet, but we all know that something has to be done.
As far as housing them here, I don't see a problem with that. Right now we house murderers, rapists, and some of the worst criminals immaginable. I don't think that these prisoners from Gitmo would pose anymore of a threat that some that are already there. However, I do think that Gitmo prisoners would have a really hard time in a prison here because of other prisoners.
Obviously, there is a lot to be worked out, especially when it comes to those in Gitmo who are actually guilty, but there has to be something done soon about the ones who aren't.
The only thing that concerns me
is having that information hacked into for anyone to have access to. I think that is my biggest concern.
So you don't believe we have national security concerns?
If you do believe we have national security issues then what is your answer to keeping us safe?
I share your concerns and agree
with everything you have said, but after having been in this business since the early 70s, I've learned never to expect anyone to speak up on behalf of MTs except the MTs themselves. I have never paid membership fees to AAMT and have never had the need to pay for certification, but I would pay MT union due in a heartbeat.
The constituents who brought her their concerns...
does freedom not extend to them also? They don't have a right to at least ask about the books? Which is what they did...and she took their concerns to the city council, which is her job as mayor. Why do you seek to curtail others' freedom in the name of freedom? They did not get what they wanted, but they certainly should have the freedom to ask and be heard. Isn't that exactly what you are saying we must protect??
You are expressing a lof of our concerns and fears
The dems won't even tell us where they are going to get the money from. They should do the math, Obama promises that middle income will not be taxed any more. Right, that's exactly like when Clinton promised during his campaign he would not increas middle income takes and within days after getting into the white house he not only didn't keep his promise but he gave the middle income the largest tax increase since who knows when. So why should I believe Obama? Especially since his voting record shows that he voted to increase taxes.
This is not a hateful post. It is a true fear that a lot of us have. You CANNOT redistribute the wealth and give to the poor who aren't doing anything to deserve it. For all those liberals who are for this type of program please send in your name and address so you can pay my share since you believe its okay. I don't! I work very hard for what I have. I'm already working 14 hours a day and I still hardly have enough money to pay bills, let alone save anything for a retirement. Why should they take more from me.
People need to be held responsible for themselves. If they need charity, that is what the churches are suppose to be for, and other organizations that help the poor. The people need to pick up some skills so they can get out in society and earn a living like the rest of us do.
For all the conservatives out there you need to keep expressing your opinions and fears. People need to be aware of what this Obama is and what his socialist programs will turn America into. This is not the America that our founding fathers fought for. Socialists have infiltrated the system, written laws that protect them and screw us, all the while telling you that you need to feel patriotic about getting screwed. Conservatives need to stand up for what's right and not be bullied by the liberals anymore.
This is not hysteria - it is people expressing their concerns
The moment somebody brings up something that is questionable (and with good reason) about Obama the liberals are quick to say it's hysteria. Watching all the news stations its the same way. It was even brought up on one of the stations tonight about the vicious attacks on Palin. Now their coming out with a porn movie intentionally starring someone that looks like her (I'll be a lot of the liberals and liberal media are happy about that). But once again I heard the liberals say that the poor democrats have been "picked on" for so long that this is okay behavior. The disgusting way they turn it around and will say conservatives are "picking on Obama", but with their dirty campaign tactics and commercials they are only "bringing to light" the truths about McCain. It's all very one sided and I see that on this board too.
Conservatives have a very real and very valid concern about Obama and his shady past (to include where he was born and if he is actually legitimate to become president). The people who are his mentors, spiritual advisors, who gave him his start in politics, and the people who are advising him, along with the dirty bashing from liberal media, makes it very hard for one to have any "faith" in this person. He is so busy covering up his past, his voting record, the people he associates with, etc, etc. Sure he's a stellar speaker. After all - he is a lawyer. He knows how to capture his audience with stories. But lynch mob....I'm hearing it on Obama's side too.
The subject did not change. I will address you concerns
You remember the one about the fact that our tax system has always been progressive and the table posted above shows you just how moderate in comparison Obama's proposed tax rate is. What I want to know is were those 7 republican presidents between 1932 and 1981 all MORE socialist than Obama or what?
Then you haven't been listening to a lot of people's concerns
It is clear half the country feels safer with McCain. The other half doesn't care.
Feel free to direct your concerns to the Administrator. sm
You can reach the adminstrator at Admin@MTStars.com. As far as deleting, since the incident of several weeks ago, I have made a concerted effort on BOTH boards to keep the bashing to a minimum.
The Nobel Peace prize is given for environmental concerns. sm
The Nobel Peace prize was given in 2004 to Wangari Maathai of Kenya, an environmental activist, for forming the Greenbelt Movement, so the Peace prize being given for environmental concerns is not new......
You mean like his mom and grandmother who raised him?
su
This is the question being raised? Where would
nm
Recruitment is low because they RAISED their quota. And, they
x
from his teens on he was raised by maternal
I just read he was raised by his maternal white grandparents from his teen years to adulthood and all thru college....
But that's not what I meant.....I meant when he is campaigning (I should have made that more clear in the last post) - in every state - I see a predominance of white people. I do not believe white people are a majority today and if so many like/love Obama, how come from state-to-state I MAINLY see whites? Again, this is strictly a curious question and not the least bit racist intended........I'm white....
I know black people who are voting for him, personally and famous, voting for him - but on TV and in the campaign only state-to-state, I only see whites...
She has raised most all her kids while in some form...
of public service. I think she is fully capable of raising this one. I see no evidence to the contrary.
Come on now...are you saying that if the Obamas had a down's child and he was elected that Michelle should just stay in the white house and raise him and not do what the first ladies normally do? They travel, they give speeches, yada yada.
Palin's husband will be of help. It's not like she is going to be in DC, just she and Trig with no help whatsoever.
Yes, he is a down's baby, but he is perfectly healthy in every other way.
Well, so far the Dems have raised as issues...
Sarah palin's pregnant daughter and her pastor. Anyone who talked about obama's pastor got sliced and diced. Talk about gutter politics. And glaring double standard.
Whatever Palin is, she is NOT a Marxist/socialist, and it is patently obvious the change Obama wants...as David ALinsky stands by and cheers.
So what? I know people that were raised as practicing -
witches. Doesn't mean they're all gonna drop a house on someone.
He was raised by his "white" grandmother.
x
Congratulations, you have obviously raised your daughter right.
xx
Born and raised in Chatta
Left there years ago but still visit some, went to high school there, Red Bank. I still get the News Free Press on line to make sure everything on the up and up there.
My children have always been raised with boundries . . . s/m
and consequences, and that's why they are exceptionally ethical, compassionate young adults, straight-A students, and, in general, wonderful human beings well on their way to being productive, responsible grown adults. I am their parent first, always. I have instilled them with the information and tools to make wise decisions, and this seems to be working well for me and them.
Well my son is being raised in an all white family (stepdad)
I don't know how Obama was raised but maybe it has something to do with it.
and he was raised by his radical islamic stepfather
Be very aware..........
and if his wife is a member of the CFR - trust me, he's involved too.....
New World Order - New American Century - Skull and Bones - read up on it.........
You're confused - she was raised in Idaho
x
I was raised by very conservative, strict parents. - sm
But once you get beyond high school, and into college or out into the working world, you meet so many different kinds of people. I'd be lying if I said I got along with all of them (or even maybe most of them?) But in my own experience, beginning back when I met the first gay person I ever knew (he had his own horse, and he let me ride it all the time), my personal friendships have been good ones. I wouldn't trade any of them for anything, and feel sad when I think they sometimes have to live certain aspects of their lives as ƈnd-class' citizens. Especially when each and every one contributes so much to society, and to life in general. So I really have no idea, as well.
I am not afraid of a black man raised by whites. sm
Flame away, but.....What I AM afraid of is people who cannot see the forest for the trees, those who are so bamboozled by his smoke and mirrors and snake oil, how this "black man raised by whites" is going to pay for all the pie-in-the sky promises he is making. We all know socialized medicine does not work. Look at all the Canadians coming here for their medical procedures etc. How much money can he take from the "have's" to give to the "have not's?" So if I make over $250K, then I have to give money to somebody who doesn't work and will never work? And don't even get me started on his stand on the abortion issue. Conversely, McCain does not have all the answers either. I don't know who would or who does, but I do know this: It is not Obama.
Please address the 4 key points raised in terms of
x
Hubert Hoover raised taxes
during an economic recession and that lead to The Great Depression. Obama is the one wanting to raise taxes here. He wants to raise taxes on companies who are already hurting right now because of the financial crisis. This will lead to less jobs and more companies closing and going out of the country. FDR introduced several new deals which were government assistant programs that were supposed to help people during the great depression and those new deals have actually been proven to lengthen the duration of the great depression.....not help it. Obama wants to introduce new government assisted programs. To me....Obama will be the absolutely worst thing for this economy.
As for Sarah Palin....at least she has run something which is more than I can say for Obama. He may have been a community organizer but the buildings in his region that were for low-income families, like the ones owned by Rezko, were often without heat and were horrible living conditions. Sarah Palin has run a state where she is very popular. She has cut spending in her state. She has no problem standing up to her own party. These are very admirable things. Yes, Obama has been on the senate but he hasn't been on there very long. His experience of running things and making executive decisions is seriously lacking. Instead of cutting back government spending, he wants to raise our taxes. Gee....that sounds like change, huh. A man looking out for us little people.....whatever. Obama has never once stood up against his own party. His own running mate said he didn't have the experience. The amount of pork Obama has spent government money on is just outrageous. The key to this whole thing is to get government under control and stop the spending.....not let government get bigger and control more of OUR money.
Suggest independent researching of the issues raised here...
they are valid and should be looked at. Thanks for posting.
Obama raised as practicing Muslim - see link
This is not in ancient times. He was a practicing Muslim as an adult. Question is, is he still a practicing muslim hiding as a Christian. See link.
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/obama-grew-up-muslim-half-brother.html
Raised by a Muslim father and Christian mother
It is a crock, it was refuted. You live in a very small world with no understanding of other cultures. That picture shows me that when he returned to Kenya to meet his father's family, he put on clothing that other Kenyan men wear...Christians and Muslims alike. When I lived in the Middle East with my husband and his family, I wore Hijab and covered my head out of RESPECT for them and for the people whose country I was visiting. Respect obviously is a foreign concept to you. Christiane Amanpour is a Christian who travels to the Middle East and when she does, she covers her head and wears hijab, like she did when she made God's Warriors. Barbara Walters wears a head cover when traveling in the Middle East. She is a Christian. I will not waste my time citing any other examples to support my claim that you are so small minded, bigoted and misinformed it borders on the criminal.
Whatever. How about addressing the actual issues I raised in my post for a change? (NT)
/
What available information suggests Sarah palin's children will be raised...
by a succession of nannies?
Those are ethnic Alaskan names, part of her heritage and where she was raised...
do you REALLY want to get into a discussion about ethnic names when your candidate is named Barack Hussein Obama?
Can we please dump this ridiculous issue? He was named because his parents were proud of their heritage. So are Sarah Palin's children.
Good grief!! Unbelievable!!
Honey chile, I was bred, born and raised in the deep south. LOL
Reply
Any so-called knowledge can later prove to be wrong. There are very few absolutes in this world. I do know that the 1990s saw a dessimation in our human intelligence gathering. We need to get back to being good at that. If a threat is there, I'm not willing to wait until people die to do something about it. If you are, then I hope it's not one of my loved ones in the next airplane or subway or building. As for Al-Qaeda, there has been much damage done to that organization. Of course the news doesn't play that up very much, but it's happening. We're still looking for Bin Laden, we're still chasing Al-Qaeda, and we're planting a seed in the middle east that will hopefully someday (and it may take longer than your of my lifetime to accomplish) make a change in the middle east that will hopefully keep the horror of terrorism at least under control. We fought the Japanese, we fought the Nazis... I think we can handle Iraq and Al-Qaeda. As for N. Korea, you can't do anything there because they already HAVE the nukes. At least we can cross Iraq off the list for sure in the nuke department.
Thanks for the reply. (nm)
nm
Reply....
You missed my point also, because you are still harping on abortion "against God's will." No matter how many times I say it, you will not hear it, because it does not further your agenda to hear it.
I am not against abortion because it is against God's will. I am against abortion because it is murder, and it is murder of the most innocent life that exists. That is a deeply moral issue, and it does not stem from what or what is not God's will. You said you and God parted company a long time ago, but I am willing to bet your morality did not part and go with God...you kept it, right? Of course you did. Because we all have basic morality, whether or not you choose to believe in God. Belief in God validates and enhances that morality, but even those of you who do not believe in God have morals...right? Of COURSE you do. There are people who are NOT religious who oppose abortion on a strictly moral level. As that article said that I posted, if I lost my faith today, I would still morally oppose abortion. Yet it is more comfortable for you to claim that I am against abortion "in the name of God." I am against abortion because it is morally wrong. PERIOD.
Being pro choice does mean being pro abortion. If you vote for the right to choose, you are putting the okay stamp on it. You can spin it however you like, but the truth remains. It is your choice to do so, yes, but at least have the guts say so.
I have already said that I work toward supporting women who decide to make a choice for life. If they decide to go ahead with the abortion, they do not get condemnation from me, but they certainly know were I stand, and they also respect what I am doing and understand why I am doing it. Much unlike you ladies.
Again....try to let this sink into your closed mind. I am trying to give the CHILD a choice. The CHILD has no voice. You are taking that away from them. They have no recourse, no place to run, no place to hide. All they can do is endure being sliced and diced to have their brain sucked out. You want the MOTHER to have the choice, the voice, the power. I am merely saying that the CHILD deserves SOMETHING here, doesn't it? Doesn't something in your moral structure scream out to you that the CHILD deserves SOME consideration in all this?? That is where I and others like me come in. Because we believe the child DOES deserve consideration, DOES deserve to have a voice.
You say "I have intolerance for those who cannot take another's opinion or perception without tearing it down." Is that not EXACTLY what all your posts do to my opinions and perceptions? Including completely ignoring what I am actually saying and trying to put words in my mouth to suit your anti-God agenda.
You can't see the forest for the trees.
my reply
was meant in a humorous, light tone. Sorry you are so unhappy with current events.
reply
As far as who can accomplish all these goals -- a journey begins with a single step. Barack is willing to start the journey. McCain stubbornly refuses to change course. If he does not live up to his hopes - another election in 4 years.
Experience -- time and time again current events have proven Barack's thoughtfulness and judgment have proven true. Even the current administration is following the course for a time-table that Barack proposed so long ago.
I do not see Barack as a savior -- I see a fine man with a vision for our country that matches my own.
Reply...
THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both of these claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where McCain called Alaska the largest state in America, he could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.
MORE FACTS: She is responsible for negotiating any drilling of those resources. "Primary power" may be taxation, but she also has to oversee environmental issues, etc. She cracked the monopoly and forced oil companies to bid again, and she made a necessary portion of the bid that they address environmental issues. That was left out of the FACTS. While the population of the state may not be in proportion to the size of the state, her latest approval rating is 86%. That is unheard of. None of the other candidates enjoy that as senators from their respective states. That was also left out of the FACTS.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.
MORE FACTS: When the National Guard is called up within a state, the governor does have the primary responsibility of mobilization and oversight. Since she is 50 miles from Russia, having control of the National Guard in that state is certainly central to our national security. And the operative word is AFTER the unit is deployed. Making the decision to call them up and send them to war IS her decision, and DOES affect national security.
THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January of 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.
MORE FACTS: This is true. But if Democrats truly believe in hope and change, they have had since January to actually do it. Have seen zip, zilch, nada. Got news for you...Bush is not a true conservative, especially fiscally obviously. McCain is.
THE FACTS: It's true that Obama voted "present" dozens of times, among the thousands of votes he cast in an eight-year span in Springfield. Illinois lawmakers commonly vote that way on a variety of issues for technical, legal or strategic reasons. Obama, for instance, voted "present" on some abortion measures to encourage wavering legislators to do the same instead of voting "yes." Their "present" votes had the same effect as "no" votes and helped defeat the bills. Voting this way also can be a way to duck a difficult issue, although that's difficult to prove.
MORE FACTS: Nice spin. He still voted "present." If he can't make a decision on those bills, he is going to be able to make the big ones to run the country? You can't vote present in the oval office. However, he did show up to vote NO to the Infants Born Alive act...twice.
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes over $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
MORE FACTS: Look at this and digest it. First paragraph...Obama's plan will raise income for middle income taxpayers by 5% by 2012...he does not define "middle class." McCain's plan is going to CUT taxes across all levels and still raise the "middle income" by 3%. I think I will take the tax cut and the 3%. No brainer.
Obama wants to provide 80 billion in tax breaks to people who already pay almost 0 taxes. Where, pray tell, is that $80 billion going to come from?? Taxing the "rich" which will trickle down to loss of jobs and depression of the economy. Won't work. Never works. Case in point..small businesses that make more than $250,000 would see taxes rise. That is about every small family business in this country, who employ a lot of people. Just throw them all under the bus in order to cut taxes for people who pay the least taxes of all of us ANYWAY.
NO THANKS.
Reply
You know what truly amazes me? EVERYONE srcutinizes Obama for EVERY LITTLE THING from the b/c issue to his education, whether he is muslim, is he a terrorist, does he believe in this or that,etc but while GWB did pretty much whatever he wanted especially outside of the law whether it be national/international and the level of scrutiny bestowed upon him when he was first elected to office up until now has been been pretty much nonexistent.. or people saying 'i don't trust him', ' he frightens me' 'he is scary'. Should have been afraid of Bush and truly fear what you MAY NEVER know regarding the true state of this country of the last eight years..truly amazing
reply
Throw that hood in the wash, its getting dingy. 12 year olds, we know what you are saying there.
I made no "moral judgment" on SP's premarital pregnancy - merely pointing out the historical precedent she set.
I did reply, it is below....but I will reply again here...
I cannot find anything where Republicans voted for this issue before they voted against it. If you can, present it. I looked. In the case when McCain co-sponsored the bill that I have posted information about, where he predicted this exact thing happening, it never made it out of the committee. All the Republicans on the comittee voted for it, all of the Democrats on the comittee voted against it.
This is what the bill would have done:
1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and (2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board.
Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting.
Sounds like the bailout bill doesn't it? Would have been nice if they had not blocked the legislation that would have fixed the problem and not stuck us with it?
I did not reply to it because I have not seen it -
I have not been on the news or TV today so am not aware of what you are talking about. Will, however, before I go to bed, find out what is going on so that I can discuss it later...
reply
poster says duh? Exactly. Overwrought rhetoric destroys the validity of any discussion.
|
