Watch out, Mitch Albom's on a tear

regulation... (0.00 / 2)

"In a world where banks hemorrhaged trillions in a high-priced gamble called credit derivative swaps that YOU failed to regulate"

This wasn't a failure of regulation. Government agencies (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac) did this with the encouragement of the executive and lesiglative branches of the Federal government.

But yes, Mitch makes a lot of great points. I remember in 1995 with Albom showed some backbone and work ethic when he stepped over the loafing Free Press "workers" during that strike and decided to do something productive and got back to work.

---

by: sidgrange @ Sun Dec 14, 2008 at 13:24:21 PM CST

The Gramm-Beach-Bliley Act... (4.00 / 2)

provided legislation to make the credit default swaps illegal.

It wasn't regulation that caused this.  It was the government deciding to NOT regulate that banks.

Get lost, troll.  Your repug talking points have been debunked 100 times over.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Sun Dec 14, 2008 at 17:27:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Correction.... (4.00 / 1)

Meant to say "It was the government deciding to NOT regulate the banks."

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Sun Dec 14, 2008 at 17:30:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Democrat talking point, actually. (0.00 / 0)

It's a Democrat talking point, actually. There are some quotes from Andrew Cuomo in which he laid out the policy of extending mortgages to undeserved people who could not pay them.

Please read this article from the Village Voice:

http://www.villagevoice.com/20...

The "get lost troll" retort when presented with the facts is not the best discussion tactic, really.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 04:46:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry.... (0.00 / 0)

I meant to say "super troll".  And you didn't present any facts, you just spun deregulation as regulation.

Many things being mentioned in the article make the same point I'm making.

The GSEs don't actually sell mortgages to borrowers. They buy them from banks and mortgage companies, allowing lenders to replenish their capital and make more loans. They also purchase mortgage-backed securities, which are pools of mortgages regularly acquired by the GSEs from investment firms.

Are you just pointing out the article so you can blame Clinton?  Of course he shares some of the blame-he signed the bill into law.  But it doesn't change the fact that deregulation caused this.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 17:48:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Is this? (0.00 / 1)

Is this the same djtyg who earlier said that people weren't forced to join unions, they were just forced to pay dues to unions?

As described in the paragraph, the GSE's were the safety-net, or cesspool at the root of the problem. Government policy, (not deregulation) encouraged these GSE's to buy the bad unsupported loans.

Deregulation caused some of the overall problem, and over-meddling government caused some of the overall problem, as described above. Over-regulation caused a major part of the problem.

While it started under Clinton, Bush really did nothing to stop it. It is/was a bipartisan problem.  

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 17:54:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The policy was deregulation. n/t (0.00 / 0)

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 18:05:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

loafing free press workers? (4.00 / 5)

apparently you've never worked for a news daily. there is no such thing as loafing in that environment. horribly over-worked and underpaid.

don't equate you pal bill oreilly's $10 mill for sitting on his ass all day to mean that's how it is everywhere.

---

by: whatever @ Sun Dec 14, 2008 at 19:14:58 PM CST

underworked and overpaid (0.00 / 2)

"Featherbedding" was rife at the Free Press before the strike. As for loafing, that is what happens when "workers" are too lazy to work, and lounge on picket lines.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 04:42:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

get some therapy (4.00 / 1)

and figure out why you hate so much. was it not getting that red wagon when you were five? let it out. a good cry might do you good.  

---

by: whatever @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 08:29:00 AM CST

[ Parent ]

First card check (4.00 / 5)

and now this?

It has been my experience that people who usually hate the unions and are so eager to attack them as being lazy and over paid are themselves...lazy and overpaid...

The difference is that they had everything handed to them by their daddies and mommies and are stupid enough to think they got where they are all on their powerful skill set...

Does that about describe it for you?

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 09:13:25 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Born on third base (4.00 / 1)

and thought he hit a triple?

---

by: happy camper @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 09:31:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

direct hit (4.00 / 1)

if you look at mack center documents, a lot of the people giving them dough are people who inherited their wealth and didn't do a damn thing to earn it other than come out of the right womb.

funny as hell. yeah, those types are the biggest anti-worker loudmouths. lol...

---

by: whatever @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 11:54:35 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The actual default rate (4.00 / 2)

of loans to lower income borrowers is below the overall default rate. A lot of the people in default are there because they lost their jobs, not because they bought more house than they could afford. Of course, many borrowers were fine until their ARM loans adjusted their payments up by a few hundred bucks a month. The ultra cheap money provided by Bubbles Greenspan and the ready market for credit default swaps, coupled with shoddy lending practices such as no documentation loans, are the cause of this train wreck. Not poor people. A little regulation would have gone a long way.

And Albom is an asshole. He had no economic reason to cross the Freep picket lines. For him to now act outraged on behalf of union workers is hypocritical in the extreme.

---

by: happy camper @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 09:29:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Not poor people (0.00 / 1)

That's right. Andrew Cuomo who initiated the mess is not poor, nor are the heads of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who make millions running government agencies. Nor are the US senators bribed with campaign contributions from Freddie-Mae and Fannie-Mac.

Albom had a good reason to cross the picket line. He is a professional, a real worker. Unlike the loafers on the line who quit their jobs so they could lay about and insult the real workers.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 10:14:02 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Something tells me (4.00 / 1)

you wouldn't know the difference between real work and loafing if it came up and hit you on the head...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 11:12:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It's the difference (0.00 / 1)

It's the difference between being inside the factory, or just standing around outside on a picket line.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 11:45:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

have you ever "lounged around on a picket line"? (4.00 / 3)

it is not fun standing on a cold street corner, holding signs, getting shouted at by passing cars (some people supporting you, others yelling insults & obscenities at you, or even throwing objects).

And, the only reason you stand in a picket line is because your company is screwing you over so badly that you go on strike. You're willing to band together with your coworkers and risk losing your job because your employer is violating the legal contracts they've signed.

My sense is that this dose of reality means nothing to you, anyway. After all, in some comments you claim workers are lazy on the job, the next you claim that workers are lazy if they strike. I'd hazard a guess that if all workers (striking or working) are inherently lazy, then the corporate execs must be the masterminds and do all of the work! I guess that's why they deserve a pay rate of 300 to 500 times as much as each of those lazy workers, enjoy the corporate dining rooms, use private jets for travel, have multiple homes and vehicles. If it wasn't for their hard work and their savvy business sense (to negotiate contracts supposedly in good faith and then violate those contracts, all the while managing the PR so the employees get blamed), corporate America would be doomed.

---

by: land of the free @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 11:59:30 AM CST

[ Parent ]

and Prostitution is the world's oldest profession (4.00 / 1)

so you prefer "placing your lips on people's asses" form of work?

Hmmm...

Something tells me you are not very secure in you abilities as a worker or you wouldn't fear leveling the playing field...

Two possibilities with you:

1) You are the usual jackass who has had everything handed to him from the moment of conception and hasn't done an honest days work your whole life but believes that it is all down to how teh awsum you are...

2) You are the rare jackass who came from the downtrodden and, in order to hold on to your life amongst the "better classes," you have bought into the fallacy that you are where you are because you worked your ass of and all those poor people are just to "lazy" to do "real" work.

In both instances the individual has an overinflated view of their accomplishment and skills while completely ignoring how extremely f*cking lucky they were to get where they are...

Things that make you lucky and not lazy:

1) Being born white
2) Being born male
3) Being born in a house with parents who give a damn
4) Finding someone who inspires you to learn
5) Not being poor
6) Being born in America
7) etc...etc...etc...

Anything that alleviates your social economic starting place and breaks down the barriers to advancement...

like...

8) Being born in a union household
9) Being in a union

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 14:50:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Leveling the playing field? (0.00 / 1)

"Something tells me you are not very secure in you abilities as a worker or you wouldn't fear leveling the playing field..."

Neither your guess (1) or (2) fits. Not even close. But for your information, those in (2) who have worked themselves out of poverty and into prosperity are indeed where they are because they worked their ass off. That is a fact, not fallacy. Regardless of what they say about the poor.

We've not discussed leveling the playing field, but I am always for it. As long you are helping people who are economically disadvantaged, instead of just helping those with a certain skin color.

"Anything that alleviates your social economic starting place and breaks down the barriers to advancement... "

You forgot 10), which works for the vast majority of workers who have nothing to do with unions: work hard, and get what you earn. That's the best way to success.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 15:54:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

platidtudes (4.00 / 1)

that have no real expression in reality...but I am sure it makes you feel like you are somehow special...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 15:58:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

There, you did it (0.00 / 1)

"that have no real expression in reality...but I am sure it makes you feel like you are somehow special..."

You managed to completely avoid talking of anything substantive in that post. But you did get in a couple of insults. Can't you do better than that?  

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 16:06:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Why? (4.00 / 1)

What have you said that is at all substantive?

You have attacked unions based upon some sort of hatred of them with right wing talking points...

When called on it you throw a hissy fit and demand people address your points with substance.

At some point, when you are being attacked from many different posters...you should have the sense to ask yourself if you are the problem.

You have been called out three times now by me on your tone and manner in posting here...before I or anyone else should treat you seriously, it is on you to prove you are not a troll...

Since you can't seem to define what that is...it may because you are a troll.

Or to use your own phrasology...

Real workers = poopy head

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 23:19:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

When were you... (0.00 / 0)

inside the factory?

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 17:30:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Inside the factory (0.00 / 0)

Real work gets done on the assembly line.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 17:55:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You didn't answer the question. (0.00 / 0)

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 18:06:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Noticed that (4.00 / 1)

did you?

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 23:19:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's how he rolls. (0.00 / 0)

At first he'll pretend you're not asking anything substantial.  Then he'll pretend he doesn't understand the question.

Kind of like when he won't provide proof for his claims that the UAW is using union dues to pay for their PAC, or is forcing UAW members to contribute to it against their will.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 08:17:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You contradict (0.00 / 0)

"or is forcing UAW members to contribute to it against their will."

But you already admitted this, and discussed the fee/dues workers are forced to pay even if they do not want to be UAW members. Are you changing your story?

Also, do you want information about the UAW using non-PAC dues to promote and advocate about political candites and issues, without even bothering with the PAC formality?

"At first he'll pretend you're not asking anything substantial"

That is only when someone gets so "out there" that they try to provoke a debate on the meaning of the word "Troll", which you did at least twice. Especially in messages where you give up on discussing union dues and instead want to debate the minutae of insults.

"Then he'll pretend he doesn't understand the question."

There is no pretending when the question is poorly worded, or someone asks me to defend a view I never put forth.

---

by: sidgrange @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 08:27:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Is this a new step? (0.00 / 0)

Changing the subject.  We're talking about dues being used for PAC money.

C'MON, CLARE!  ANSWER THE QUESTION, CLARE!

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 08:57:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

yawn... (0.00 / 0)

Money that people pay to an orgnization like this count as dues. This includes regular dues, the forced fee for those who do not want to be regular members, and the political funds that the union coerces people to pay which are diverted to the PAC.

---

by: sidgrange @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 09:11:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You keep saying it... (0.00 / 0)

yet when asked for proof you provide none.

Just admit that you're lying already.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 09:26:28 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You already... (0.00 / 1)

You already admitted that there are forced contributions ("dues") to regular union functions and to political activities. If there is any lying, it is lying you are doing also. I've already provided proof, and you have agreed on the important facts.

---

by: sidgrange @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 09:41:22 AM CST

[ Parent ]

No I didn't. (0.00 / 0)

I never said that dues were used for funding the UAW's Political Action Committee.  You did.  You have provided no proof of this.  You've only made statements that you refuse to back up.

You're purposefully playing dumb to keep an argument going.  That's trolling.

Either prove that dues are funding the PAC or STFU.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 09:54:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

STFU? (0.00 / 1)

"That's trolling."

Your version of the meaningless "poopyface" insult. Yet again. I already proved it, and you admitted that the contributions were involuntary.

The argument only keeps going because you forget what you said, and ask repeatedly for stuff I already told you.

"STFU"

Always a good debate tactic. As mature as the tit-baby argument tactic you used earlier.

---

by: sidgrange @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 09:59:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Haha.... (0.00 / 0)

You can't provide proof, so you're just crying that you were insulted.

For someone who finds insults laughable, you sure feel the need to respond to your wittle hurt feelings.

Just STFU.  You provided no proof, and have none.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 10:01:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

So now (4.00 / 1)

you want the unions to provide a service without being compensated for it...

You are a funny sort of capitalist!

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 10:33:14 AM CST

[ Parent ]

i walked a picket line (4.00 / 1)

i walked a picket line with my dad when i was little...then he took me home and went to work on a friend's farm to help pay the bills while his union was out on strike.

anyone who thinks this strike thing is some cushy job is a silver-spoon-in-mouth, still-living-in-mom's-basement-sucking-on-her-tit loser.  

---

by: whatever @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 14:32:07 PM CST

Lazy! (4.00 / 1)

Your dad would be a real worker if he crossed the picket line and kissed his boss' ass on a daily basis...or some such sh*t like that from the great wingnut thinker sidgrange...

I think a union guy stole his woman from him...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 14:53:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Real worker (0.00 / 1)

No, real workers go into the factory and go back to the lines and do stuff. If they instead kiss boss's asses, then they are almost as lazy as picket-line loafers.

The "Your dad" and "Sh*t" and "Wingnut" stuff is nonsequiturs showing you have no intent to discuss real issues or facts.

Stole his woman? I think you are babbling. Anything, as long as you don't have to deal with the facts.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 15:19:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What facts? (4.00 / 1)

right wing talking points that have no basis in fact?

Define what the hell you mean by "real workers" that doesn't come across as plain dumb and you might get somewhere.

Don't roll in here and pretend that you are somehow the purveyor of high speech and dialog.

I would've thought you'd wet your pants with glee given that was the exact response you wanted with your opening salvo...

Spare me the moral high ground BS...at least until you learn to argue your points without using crayons...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 15:57:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

crayons, wet pants and talking points? (0.00 / 1)

I have no idea what the "right-wing talking points" are. I suppose it is some lame argument on your part, like some conservatives do the same thing.

Real workers are the ones doing the work. It is just plain dumb to attempt to expand the definition to non-workers.

"at least until you learn to argue your points without using crayons..."

You are babbling again. You spent most of the above post insulting and changing the subject. Only the 2nd sentence had anything to do with sticking to the subject.  

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 16:04:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And you failed (4.00 / 1)

to address it...

Because your whole entrance into this site was designed to produce a reaction.

I guess it beats "real work..."

Your first entry, which most people missed was to attack card check (right wing talking point)...when no one noticed that, you decided to attack worker who are organizing in an attempt to level the playing field (something you claim to support) in relation to the owners.

Your choosing to focus on the amount of money (which you get wrong...IE: another right wing talking point) union workers are able to carve out for themselves while the rich are ripping off the middle class by the billions.

You are either a very underinformed person or another wingnut hack trying to stir up trouble...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 23:24:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Real work (0.00 / 1)

"right wing talking point"

What do you mean by that exactly? I read the Democrats' own proposal to get rid of free choice in union votes. That is where I got my information. I don't care what Limbaugh or the "right wing" says about it. Perhaps it is just another lame insult. Anything rather than refer to specific issues, right?

"you decided to attack worker who are organizing in an attempt to level the playing field"

What the worker was doing had nothing to do with "leveling the playing field".

"Your choosing to focus on the amount of money (which you get wrong...IE: another right wing talking point) union workers are able to carve out for themselves while the rich are ripping off the middle class by the billions."

That is not very coherent. Can you reword your statement? You accuse me of focusing on money, and at the end of the statement you actually focus on money.

"You are either a [meaningless insult] or [yet another nonsequitur meaningless insult]"

Yawn. Here we go again. A suggestion: stick to facts, instead of clever insults and false accusations. And be clear and consistent in arguments.

---

by: sidgrange @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 04:46:16 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Wow (4.00 / 1)

you are not very bright...but you seem to think you are clever...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 10:35:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It's not job (0.00 / 1)

"anyone who thinks this strike thing is some cushy job"

Its not a job. It's loafing. Not one car has been built on a picket line. Not one nugget of coal mined, not one ounce of steel smelted.

Kids should be brought up to to believe that you get ahead by working hard, not by loafing.

---

by: sidgrange @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 15:57:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

feel better... (0.00 / 0)

sad little man?

I certainly hope you aren't posting on this site when you should be working...that would be lazy...

I guess you believe that workers owe their labor to the employer and are not allowed to negotiate, and even withhold their work should the employer not agree to terms...

Congratulations...you just reinvented slavery.

Huzzah!

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Dec 15, 2008 at 23:27:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

oh snap! (0.00 / 0)

but they're posting at work and getting away with it...and because they're getting away with it and haven't been caught bilking their employers it's okay because that's what the free market is all about: it's not unethical unless you get caught.  

---

by: whatever @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 07:09:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

crackle. pop (0.00 / 1)

Actually, I am sitting in barcalounger in the middle of a picket line, using a laptop and sipping martinis.

---

by: sidgrange @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 07:42:34 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You're acting like a troll... (0.00 / 0)

A troll is someone who is new to an online community who says intentionally inflammatory things to make people angry.  That's what you're doing with comments like this.

I don't mind disagreement or differing opinions, but this kind of thing in unnecessary.

No, it makes no difference to me that you think you're responding to provocation.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 10:07:39 AM CST

[ Parent ]

So (0.00 / 0)

I guess I was right then...you are sitting at work posting on this site instead of working.

I won't go so far as to call you lazy, but you certainly are a thief if that is what you are doing...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 10:36:39 AM CST

[ Parent ]