not even a pretense at discussion or engagement, just straight up insults and derailing. Cool posting

bring back the God dude, at least he was interesting

Chairman, i dont need to debunk anything, you whole basis is that the banks had predatory lending practices , and they were the only problem....thats just untrue...while the banks did do these things and were unscrupulous , they broke NO laws in the process...the only law that was broke, was an ethical one.....theres always two sides to a story and you think only one side pertains , thats bullshit.....go feed it somewhere else

telling one side doesn't mean the other side doesn't automatically not exist, only you believe that. These practices exasperated the problem and threw more people into the bubble than what was normal. There were a lot of factors but this was a MAJOR factor. Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.

thanks for swooping in and ruining another thread though. Got to get a hissy fit in wherever you can I guess.

again, moron.. "threw people into the "bubble"", the bubble encompassed everyone...the sub-prime market was 7% of the entire real estate market, and that was the catalyst for the entire downturn...

nah not feeding your superiority complex anymore, laters~

you talk like you know things...you know nothing.....copy and pasting something you know nothing about give you absolutely no creditability

I still don't understand why ssoreenn is under the mistaken apprehension that I dislike my employer.

Could you explain that one, ssorenn? I'm genuinely puzzled by that assertion.

you had a chance to actually engage like a normal human adult but you blew that acting like a spoiled child. If you really do have 25 years of experience, putting you at what, late 30s? 40s? That's seriously embarrassing for you.

i dont need to engage you, i just said you were wrong

yet you seem so eager to do it now, weird

trust me, i sleep well

It's easy to sleep well when your mind is empty.

on my Partasi sheets on my Dux bed---you probably have no idea what those are, always something to look forward to---but my pockets are full, Jamie

I'm hungry. Does that count Jamiet? But not for long. Ssorenn just ordered some Maine lobsters on ice to be overnighted to my house.

i'll feed you anyday AG

See! Personal responsibility towards charity. Good fellow, indeed!

Im not quite sure you need the charity AG, but good people are good people

The problem with socialism is now my tax money will go to pay for things I don't need or agree to. Like paved roads in the poor area. They just use the roads to help their get away drivers. Pathetic. If the roads were dirt, and not kept up properly, we could catch more bad guys and put them in overpopulated prisons.

And don't get all crazy on me either. These guys love jail, per the liberal Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/06/michael-simoneau-meunier-facebook-prison_n_5776970.html

there are many problem with socialism---this is why Obama need to GO

https://33.media.tumblr.com/c5b8eda8a415ec8a72a2cc1bb9e2fd48/tumblr_nbn7hyIuHS1s2yegdo1_400.gif

is that why you got the comedy cube?

Maybe.

now thats funny

Then +1 me boi

I love to hear/read Americans debate socialism. It is like watching children play 'Dad, mom and kids' (or what ever you call it in English when they pretend to be a family).

It might look and sound like the real World but it isn't. It is simplified to a point beyond understanding. It is usually centered around one element which both parties a fighting over like it could end every discussion. And it always ends up in one big argument and with name calling.

For the children this is okay. They don't know and don't understand that their parents properly is doing the same in different ways. They argue like there always is a correct way to do things.

Adults should know better. But then again adults are just kids you got older.

Denmark and the other Scandinavian countries are usually brought in to the debate at some point. So being Danish I kinda look forward to that point in the debate. I think it was Bill O'Reilly who in a debate with John Steward said that it was unfair to use the Scandinavia countries as an example.

But I'll do it any way. But this is only because people without jobs are people to and they don't deserve to be called bad things because they are unemployed at the moment.

The Scandinavian countries all have much better social securities than the US and UK. I don't think anybody will disagree on that. So I won't prove that point.

If the argument of 'people on welfare won't work' is to hold up, then the unemployment levels would be better in US and UK.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and Eurostats latest numbers according to Google (the numbers is from May and June 2014 because thats what they got for the 5 countries):
US 6.3 % in May and 6.1 % in June
UK 6.5 % (Only numbers from May)
DK 6.4 % in May and 6.5% in June
NO 3.2 % (Only numbers from May)
SE 7.8 % in May and 8.0 % in June

If we look over the last 8 years the top and bottom of the countries are as follow:
US 4.4 - 10.0 %
UK 5.0 - 8.3 %
DK 3.1 - 7.9 %
NO 2.4 - 3.8 %
SE 5.6 - 9.3 %

There really only is one conclusion from the numbers. Better social securities doesn't create more unemployment. The argument can therefore only be true if the people in the 5 countries are different. The differens being the peoples work moral or slackness if you prefer that term.

I don't know that many Americans but they don't seem to be lacy.

And by the way - Obama isn't Socialist.

"in't the markets starving these people"

Yes it absolutely is. The markets always starve people while overfeeding others. Free trade has caused countries to ignore production of a domestic food supply while focusing on crap crops for export. A direct result of the market.

*cash crops