that is not what the tea folks want according to their actions. They want the status quo. Look at the people they back. Nothing big there. The only person for drastic change is ron paul. The tea folks are not backing him. They hate his foriegn policy. They hate his stance on drugs. They will not support him so really anyone who thinks the tea folks are for small government has not seen who or what they actually support
Originally Posted by WTF
I think you are confusing the ESTABLISHMENT assholes who've co-opted the Tea Party with the original intent of the PEOPLE who started the movement.
There were more than enough $70,000 and $80,000 houses in this country that could have been sold to people.
Blaming Carter, or Clinton, or whomever seems utterly ridiculous.
Originally Posted by Doove
So, the people who didn't move to the communities where they could find those houses are geniouses or something along those lines? Or did they take advantage of the LAWS that regulated the banks into giving those loans.
If you really think about it, allowing those McMansion loans to fly out the door created a demand bubble that inflated housing values. Then the DEREGULATION, via the repeal of Glass-Steagal, ala, Clinton w/an R congress, allowed the banks to become "too big to fail".
Had gvmt stayed out of the way in the first place, we wouldn't have had the housing bubble, nor the "too big to fail" industries they are now "trying" to reign in.
The Original Tea Party was opposed to bail outs and wanted those "too big to fail" banks to fail. It was the gvmt who coined that phrase and the gvmt who bailed them out. Yes, it may have been bad for the economy for a short term, but we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now. And don't say it was all Bushes fault, BO ran back to DC to vote FOR, not against, the bail outs. He's just as responsible.