How are we going to pay for all this shit?

adav8s28's Avatar
Blimey! .... So NOW you're a Art Major also!

### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again
You're a lawyer right? At least you were when you were JL

I did not write that i had a degree in Art History. I wrote that you could major in Art History and if you took the science classes that I listed you could get into Medical School.

It's the same thing with getting into Law School. You can major in anything. Do well on the LSAT you can get in.

Why was that so difficult to comprehend?
.

How do you know that I can't get in? I have not been rejected from any medical school. I gave him the curriculum not "part of the curriculum" Originally Posted by adav8s28
Well, could it possibly be the case that the reason you have not been rejected by any medical school is that you realized your undergrad grades were poor enough that you'd have no hope of admission, so you didn't bother to waste any time applying?

(Asking for a friend.)

Regarding your previous post (#582):

You still have about a half hour to edit or delete it so as to avoid further embarrassment. I've had about enough of your obtuseness and disingenuousness. You have no understanding of this issue. Yeah, we all get that you're a sycophantic Obama fanboy, but really -- this is just ridiculous!

Heading out for the evening and don't have time to properly refute your post, but may get to it later in the week.

In the meantime, you might try learning something about this topic before you post again. (Yeah, sure. Like that's really going to happen!)

.
adav8s28's Avatar
I didn't say anything about getting a degree in Premed. But the bottom line is you don't have a Medical Degree or any training in Epidemiology or Public Health so quit giving advice on Covid-19 or the Vaccines, got it. Originally Posted by Levianon17
I have enough of a formal education in the sciences to discuss antigens, antibodies and messenger RNA on eccie.net. When provider R.M. incorrectly recommended that humans take the IVmerctin that is for animals to fight off CoVid you didn't say one word about that. Why does she get a pass? Is it because she is a Trump worshiper?

You act like I suggested that CoVid patients be given a disinfectant to clear the virus like our former President Trump suggested.
... If you say so, "Picasso"...

### Salty
adav8s28's Avatar
.



Well, could it possibly be the case that the reason you have not been rejected by any medical school is that you realized your undergrad grades were poor enough that you'd have no hope of admission, so you didn't bother to waste any time applying?

(Asking for a friend.)

Regarding your previous post (#582):

You still have about a half hour to edit or delete it so as to avoid further embarrassment. I've had about enough of your obtuseness and disingenuousness. You have no understanding of this issue. Yeah, we all get that you're a sycophantic Obama fanboy, but really -- this is just ridiculous!

Heading out for the evening and don't have time to properly refute your post, but may get to it later in the week.

In the meantime, you might try learning something about this topic before you post again. (Yeah, sure. Like that's really going to happen!)

. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
Obama/Biden cleaned up the mess that Bush and Dick Cheney left behind. You make it seem that Bush43 cleaned up his own mess. I don't believe that to be the case. All you have to do is read the time line of your wiki link (don't tell that to Lexus Lover he is always critical of me when I quote from wiki) LOL.

In your post #546 you wrote Obama did not bailout anyone at the top of post. Near the bottom of the post you wrote that Obama mishandled the bailout of GM? You can't have it both ways. Plus TARP did not end until 2014. Bush43 left office Jan 20th, 2009.

So, Let's see what you got Captain.
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
Obama/Biden cleaned up the mess that Bush and Dick Cheney left behind. You make it seem that Bush43 cleaned up his own mess. I don't believe that to be the case. All you have to do is read the time line of your wiki link (don't tell that to Lexus Lover he is always critical of me when I quote from wiki) LOL.
Let's see what you got Captain. Originally Posted by adav8s28

you mean the mess slick willie blythe lit the fuse on. like many other things young padawan .. you seem lacking on facts.


under who's watch did HUD mandate more minority lending? slick willie blythe. that fuse took about 10 years to blow up in the Government's face. the bailout ... was really the Government bailing themselves out over their "woke" lending policy at HUD.


"HUD stuck with an outdated policy that allowed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to count billions of dollars they invested in subprime loans as a public good that would foster affordable housing."


How HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...060902626.html


By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 10, 2008


In 2004, as regulators warned that subprime lenders were saddling borrowers with mortgages they could not afford, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development helped fuel more of that risky lending.


Eager to put more low-income and minority families into their own homes, the agency required that two government-chartered mortgage finance firms purchase far more "affordable" loans made to these borrowers. HUD stuck with an outdated policy that allowed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to count billions of dollars they invested in subprime loans as a public good that would foster affordable housing.


Housing experts and some congressional leaders now view those decisions as mistakes that contributed to an escalation of subprime lending that is roiling the U.S. economy.


The agency neglected to examine whether borrowers could make the payments on the loans that Freddie and Fannie classified as affordable. From 2004 to 2006, the two purchased $434 billion in securities backed by subprime loans, creating a market for more such lending. Subprime loans are targeted toward borrowers with poor credit, and they generally carry higher interest rates than conventional loans.


Today, 3 million to 4 million families are expected to lose their homes to foreclosure because they cannot afford their high-interest subprime loans. Lower-income and minority home buyers -- those who were supposed to benefit from HUD's actions -- are falling into default at a rate at least three times that of other borrowers.


"For HUD to be indifferent as to whether these loans were hurting people or helping them is really an abject failure to regulate," said Michael Barr, a University of Michigan law professor who is advising Congress. "It was just irresponsible."


Congress is expected to vote before its Fourth of July recess on legislation that would strip HUD of its regulatory authority over Fannie and Freddie and give it to a stronger regulator.


Fannie and Freddie finance about 40 percent of all U.S. mortgages, with $5.3 trillion in outstanding debt. Owned by private shareholders but chartered by Congress, they are exempt from state and local taxes and receive an estimated $6.5 billion-a-year federal subsidy because they can borrow money more cheaply than other investors. In return, they are expected to serve "public purposes," including helping to make home buying more affordable.


HUD officials dispute allegations that the agency encouraged abusive lending and sloppy underwriting standards that became the hallmark of the subprime industry. Spokesman Brian Sullivan said the agency and Congress wanted to increase homeownership among underserved families and could not have predicted that subprime lending would dominate the market so quickly.


"Congress and HUD policy folks were trying to do a good thing," he said, "and it worked."


Since HUD became their regulator in 1992, Fannie and Freddie each year are supposed to buy a portion of "affordable" mortgages made to underserved borrowers. Every four years, HUD reviews the goals to adapt to market changes.


In 1995, President Bill Clinton's HUD agreed to let Fannie and Freddie get affordable-housing credit for buying subprime securities that included loans to low-income borrowers. The idea was that subprime lending benefited many borrowers who did not qualify for conventional loans. HUD expected that Freddie and Fannie would impose their high lending standards on subprime lenders.


Banks typically back prime loans with customers' deposits. But subprime lenders often rely on money from Wall Street investors , who buy packages of loans as investments called mortgage-backed securities.


In 2000, as HUD revisited its affordable-housing goals, the housing market had shifted. With escalating home prices, subprime loans were more popular. Consumer advocates warned that lenders were trapping borrowers with low "teaser" interest rates and ignoring borrowers' qualifications.


HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay. Freddie and Fannie adopted policies not to buy some high-cost loans.


That year, Freddie bought $18.6 billion in subprime loans; Fannie did not disclose its number.


In 2001, HUD researchers warned of high foreclosure rates among subprime loans.


"Given the very high concentration of these loans in low-income and African American neighborhoods, the growth in subprime lending and resulting very high levels of foreclosure is a real cause for concern," an agency report said.


But by 2004, when HUD next revised the goals, Freddie and Fannie's purchases of subprime-backed securities had risen tenfold. Foreclosure rates also were rising.


That year, President Bush's HUD ratcheted up the main affordable-housing goal over the next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent. John C. Weicher, then an assistant HUD secretary, said the institutions lagged behind even the private market and "must do more."


For Wall Street, high profits could be made from securities backed by subprime loans. Fannie and Freddie targeted the least-risky loans. Still, their purchases provided more cash for a larger subprime market.


"That was a huge, huge mistake," said Patricia McCoy, who teaches securities law at the University of Connecticut. "That just pumped more capital into a very unregulated market that has turned out to be a disaster."


In 2003, the two bought $81 billion in subprime securities. In 2004, they purchased $175 billion -- 44 percent of the market. In 2005, they bought $169 billion, or 33 percent. In 2006, they cut back to $90 billion, or 20 percent. Generally, Freddie purchased more than Fannie and relied more heavily on the securities to meet goals.


"The market knew we needed those loans," said Sharon McHale, a spokeswoman for Freddie Mac. The higher goals "forced us to go into that market to serve the targeted populations that HUD wanted us to serve," she said.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 11-09-2021, 06:40 PM
Oh Waco...you forget Phil Gramm

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...eclosure-phil/

And in 1999, Gramm pushed through a historic banking deregulation bill that decimated Depression-era firewalls between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and securities firms—setting off a wave of merger mania.
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
Oh Waco...you forget Phil Gramm

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...eclosure-phil/ Originally Posted by WTF



Mother Jones ... BAHHAHHAAAAAAAAAA


In 1995, President Bill Clinton's HUD agreed to let Fannie and Freddie get affordable-housing credit for buying subprime securities that included loans to low-income borrowers. The idea was that subprime lending benefited many borrowers who did not qualify for conventional loans


case closed.


still won't explain the components of the Fed Debt?

any day now Professor .,..

I have enough of a formal education in the sciences to discuss antigens, antibodies and messenger RNA on eccie.net. When provider R.M. incorrectly recommended that humans take the IVmerctin that is for animals to fight off CoVid you didn't say one word about that. Why does she get a pass? Is it because she is a Trump worshiper?

You act like I suggested that CoVid patients be given a disinfectant to clear the virus like our former President Trump suggested. Originally Posted by adav8s28
No you don't, you've only had entry level courses. From all your self promoting posts I can tell you don't have any practical experience in this subject. By the way whatever R.M. posted, I may not of seen her posts to even comment on it.
lustylad's Avatar
Hey, let's be fair here, Lustylad. I'm not aware of it, but there may be a spirited contest for the exalted title of ECCIE Political Forum Dunning-Kruger Effect Poster Boy of the Month.

If so, adav's campaign is in fine fettle! Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
I hear you. But I'm not sure if adav8 even knows what he's competing for. Of course, being a know-it-all, he would never admit he's never heard of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. So let's help him out... the more he learns about it, the better his chances of snagging the prize!

"Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general."

https://www.britannica.com/science/D...-Kruger-effect
lustylad's Avatar
I've had about enough of your obtuseness and disingenuousness. You have no understanding of this issue. Yeah, we all get that you're a sycophantic Obama fanboy, but really -- this is just ridiculous! Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
Let's see what you got Captain. Originally Posted by adav8s28
Uh-oh! Looks like adav8 has messed with the wrong poster!

Will adav8 be the new COG?

I tend to treat people who are calm and rational and sensible and objective and articulate and non-partisan and educated and persuasive and in possession of a deep library of thought-provoking articles (like the one from Professor Todd Zywicki) as being more worthy of my attention and respect than poorly educated, incoherent, partisan-hack sycophantic Obama-Biden fanboys!

But hey, that's just me...

Pass the popcorn please
lustylad's Avatar
You're a lawyer right? At least you were when you were JL Originally Posted by adav8s28
Wow!

I can guarantee you JL and Salty Again are two different people!

On the other hand, why do I keep confusing you with flght65?
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
Uh-oh! Looks like adav8 has messed with the wrong poster.

Will adav8 be the new COG?

I tend to treat people who are calm and rational and sensible and objective and articulate and non-partisan and educated and persuasive and in possession of a deep library of thought-provoking articles (like the one from Professor Todd Zywicki) as being more worthy of my attention and respect than poorly educated, incoherent, partisan-hack sycophantic Obama-Biden fanboys!

But hey, that's just me...

Pass the popcorn, please Originally Posted by lustylad

you'll need an ecky9.5k sized supply for this ..








BAHHAAAA
adav8s28's Avatar
No you don't, you've only had entry level courses. Originally Posted by Levianon17
Wrong again Lev17. Organic Chemistry is not an entry level course, not at Harvard or at State U. You do not know what you are talking about.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 11-10-2021, 03:47 AM
Uh-oh! Looks like adav8 has messed with the wrong poster!

Will adav8 be the new COG?

I tend to treat people who are calm and rational and sensible and objective and articulate and non-partisan and educated and persuasive and in possession of a deep library of thought-provoking articles (like the one from Professor Todd Zywicki) as being more worthy of my attention and respect than poorly educated, incoherent, partisan-hack sycophantic Obama-Biden fanboys!

But hey, that's just me...

Pass the popcorn please Originally Posted by lustylad
Nobody gives a fuck about your respect or attention.

Get over yourself.

You're the hypocritical partisan hack.

You were the one touting Trumps quarterly GDP numbers.

GTFOH