I received this in an e-mail today. I'd never seen it before. Thought it was worth posting.

Father/Daughter Talk

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of 'the redistribution of wealth.'

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, 'How is your friend Audrey doing?'

She replied, 'Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over.'

Her wise father asked his daughter, 'Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.'

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, 'That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!'

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently,'Welcome to the Republican party.'

__________________
"GO HOKIES!"

Daughter needs to share this with father:

Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican
By John Gray Cincinnati, Ohio

Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.


Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should loose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in the dark)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.

By John Gray Cincinnati, Ohio - jgray7@cinci.rr.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it - Published July - 2004
Printable version: Click here!

“Remember that a government big enough to give you
everything you want is also big enough to take away
everything you have.” Barry Goldwater

I just thought it was funny that the EPA who regulates so much of what Liberals take credit for was established by President Nixon. Also the history of the FDIC was started after the Great Depression by a Republican Senator & a Democat Representative.
Funny huh how people take credit for things they didn't do?

I totally agree. Labeling a program either liberal or conservative these days is the kiss of death depending on which side of the aisle you're on. Sadly the EPA is considered a liberal program today but wasn't when President Nixon established it in the 70s. IMO, that's the point of the Joe Republican letter.

The FDIC was established by the Glass Steagall Act. This bill was sponsored by Sen. Carter Glass, D., Va and Rep. Henry Steagall, D., Al.

Nixon did indeed create the EPA.

As a result of the Great Depression, Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg and Democratic Representative Henry Steagall strove to restore public confidence after a massive series of bank runs in early 1933 caused 4,004 banks to close, with an average of $900,000 in deposits. These banks were merged into stronger banks; many months later, depositors received compensation for roughly 85% of their former deposits.[citation needed] Although President Roosevelt did not like the idea of the FDIC, as a former banker himself, he agreed to the measure to stop the hemorrhaging of the banks' available cash and the American people's trust in the U.S. Banking System.

This is where I got my information that it was a R and a D. Wikipedia

I liked both letters, and feel that if we dig deep enough we can find both Democrats AND Republicans who did both good and bad things for our country.

What I took from the Joe Republican letter is that he had a job. I have few problems giving help to someone who is trying to help themselves. My problem comes in when someone refuses to TRY and help themselves. There is WAY too much of that going on.

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

I love those they hit the nail on the head the thing I liked about BIll Clinton before was his welfare reform & yes I am totally against welfare but it seems he got alot of people off it when he was in office & I think Hilary would do the same not saying I am voting for her though but that would be one of the main reasons if I did

__________________
mom of 3 greats girls

Well said!!

__________________
"GO HOKIES!"

What it really shows is how far right the Republicans have gone. I doubt if Nixon would be welcomed into the current party.

I'm sure Lincoln rolls over in his grave every time he thinks of being in the same party as Huckabee and GWB.

I really doubt Nixon would be a welcome addition to the Democratic party as well. I don't think the Republican's have gone "Far Right" at all, especially with the person who is securing the nomination for the republican party, in fact it's gone way too moderate for me. Even Bush with all the spending is not really a true conservative. If Obama does secure the nomination for Presidency though I will most likely be voting for him.

Well I don't think that Nixon ever had god tell him to be president. I'm pretty sure that he did not fund religious charities with federal money. I don't remember him ever being particularly worried about "family values." In fact a lot of his actions were downright liberal. If he was running today as a Republican, he wouldn't stand a chance of getting nominated. I found this little piece online.

"Throughout his presidency, he consistently betrayed conservative principles by opening relations with Communist China, negotiating arms control treaties with the Soviets, imposing wage and price controls, instituting affirmative action, expanding the regulatory state, and reducing defense spending."

He also created SSI, the EPA, and OSHA.

And according to WIKI, he introduced the Comprehensive Health Insurance Act. Nixon's plan would have mandated employers to purchase health insurance for their employees, and in addition provided a federal health plan like Medicaid that any American could join by paying on a sliding scale based on income.

Boy he's sounding pretty good right about now.

And yes they have gone far right as far as social issues are concerned. And few, if any, of them have ever been particularly thrifty. They talk a bunch about tax and spend liberals, but they are the ones doing the spending. It's the paying the bills they have problems with.

[QUOTEAnd yes they have gone far right as far as social issues are concerned. And few, if any, of them have ever been particularly thrifty. They talk a bunch about tax and spend liberals, but they are the ones doing the spending. It's the paying the bills they have problems with.[/quote]

There is no longer room in the Republican party for a moderate. They have all been called RINOs and driven out of the party. There is only room for the far right fringe.

I would argue that the GOP does not only contains the extreme social conservatives but also extreme economic conservatives.

I would hope there were more "extreme economic conservatives."

How hard is it to understand that America is broke.."no money". We are in debt, the banks are in debt, most of the American people are in debt.

Apparently way too hard for George Bush, that's for sure.

And for alot of Americans.

This article was written in 1964..nowdays change the number from billions to Trillions. We never seem to learn from our mistakes.
The Importance of Being in Debt - TIME

Economic conservatives believe that success will be found in an unregulated totally free economy. They also wrongly believe that cutting taxes increases revenue even though there is not a single instance where that has ever happened. They believe in no oversite whatsover. Therefore, any gains in medium income have all gone to the top 10%.

We are broke for two main reasons. First, a tax cut was given (mostly for those in the upper 10%) during a time of war. And, secondly, contracts are being awarded without bidding to partisan supporters on a "cost plus" basis.

You need to get a clue.

We are broke because of several reasons..the top 1 reason is because we have not learned to "live within our means".
We can not continue to "tax" people on what they make "the fruits of their labor" and give to all the social programs to try to give everyone the same.
Cutting out the income tax..some do not understand because they"get back most of what they pay"..for those of us that actually pay an income tax means we carry the burden of these social programs, while the ones that benefit get a free ride. If I get to keep more of my own money that I work for then I can spend it as I chose. Which helps the economy by having me spend or save money. Saving money in a bank helps the economy also..that is where they get their money to loan to others to by a house, car, etc.
Tax cuts alone will not work, you have to cut spending. Anyone/Anything that tries to save more has to include spending cuts.
People and government need to understand you can not have everything..things do come with a price tag.
One of the best things we can do for our children is to teach them how to stay out of debt.

Edited to add: Yes I do think that an unregulated totally free economy is better than what we have now. The Federal Reserve has too much control. they cause the inflation and deinflation, the bubbles.

What we need to do is give everyone an equal opportunity to succeed in life. Social programs represent very little of our federal spending. I would be willing to bet that I pay more in income tax. I'm willing to bet that my husband and I got a bigger tax cut than you and your. Did you know that we taxpayers have shelled out over 100 billion dollars in the last two months to prop up banks and their garbage loan portfolios? Did you know that our taxpayer subsidies of corn alone make it impossible for subsistence farmers to compete? Did you know that taxpayer dollars subsidize Exxon? WalMart? You begrudge a person receiving 2 years of meager benefits after having a baby you want born?

You don't have a clue.

Social programs include Social security, etc acount for a huge amount of federal spending

Alot of what you just stated is what Ron Paul is talking about...farmers subsides he wants to get rid of, we sudside Exxon by being in the war overseas.

The Federal Reserve is where most of our problems can be traced back to. Which is not our own government.

Did your candidate vote for this stimulates bill that was passed yesterday?
Ron Paul voted NO

For others information:

The Federal Reserve Bank is a privately owned corporation

The Federal Reserve, an unelected and unaccountable private organization, pumps more dollars into the economy whenever it chooses. Basic economics tells us that the more there is of a commodity, the less valuable it becomes. This is also true of money: The dollar is worth 4 cents of what it was when the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. Every day, every dollar we hold is devalued. We pay an "inflation tax" without even realizing it because we are forced by a falling dollar to pay more for goods and services. Of all the presidential candidates, Republican or Democrat, only Dr. Paul is addressing this profound flaw in our economic system.

In 1802, then-President Thomas Jefferson wrote the following in a letter to Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin:

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Thomas Jefferson's words are proving prophetic indeed. Today, the economic bubbles created by the Fed have resulted in massive foreclosures across the country while China and Saudi Arabia, sitting on trillion-dollar sovereign wealth funds, snap up major interests in marquee American companies. America, once the world's greatest creditor nation, is now its greatest debtor.

Peoples current infatuation with the right wing is the result of collective amnesia.

The great depression was brought about mainly because of lack of regulation. Without regulation the market is taken over by con artists, speculators, and gamblers. There are great highs, horrible lows, banks have no safeguards and your money can disappear overnight. Regulation smooths out those highs and lows, keeps banking from making terrific mistakes that can cost you your entire savings. Most regulations were put there because of a need and without them, no one is safe from crooks. Imagine waking up tomorrow to find the banks all closed and your jobs gone. That is what lack of regulation can bring you. Inflation and deflation are nothing compared to that.

The government’s job is to protect the ordinary citizen, not just from terrorists, or attacks from other countries, but also from the wealthiest among us, and to do that we need regulations. Without regulations the wealthy have all the power and they aren’t afraid to abuse it . Most countries in the world do not protect their ordinary citizens and that is why our system has worked better.

The savings and loan debacle was the result of the removal of many of the regulations put in after the ’29 market crash. The presidents after Carter and their congresses have been chipping away at the regulations that worked for all the years after the great depression. We currently are approaching that point again because, in essence, we have no regulations with the current occupant of the White House, since he refuses to follow the laws that he doesn’t like, and his administration has been allowed to do the same. There is now, little or no enforcement in place. The current housing crisis is, at least partly due to rules that have either been removed or ignored. There use to be usury laws to keep interest rates from being exhorbitant, on things like credit cards. There used to be caps on how much the interest could go up in a year on flexible rate mortgages. People were not allowed to borrow on things they couldn’t afford. All those regulations, gone or ignored.

No, the Federal Reserve is not the root of our economic problems. We subsidize Exxon with actual dollars. Exxon made $75,000 dallars a second last year. Capitalism at its best, I suppose. And 50,000 Americans got to put heating costs on their credit cards. Exxon has profited from the war in Iraq.

another example: Crossing the Lines

Social Security is self financed.

We also subsidize WalMart.

I think the only time that we should subsidize business is when the technology is nascent and start up costs prohibitive. An example would be the internet when it was getting off the ground. Another, more timely, example would be alternative fuels.

The Federal Reserve (the Fed) does control the money.
We need to have a "sound money" system. What we have now is not back by anything other than the confidence in the American economy. Our money is not backed by gold or anything, and now the world is begining to lose confidence in the dollar.

"The Federal Reserve, an unelected and unaccountable private organization, pumps more dollars into the economy whenever it chooses. Basic economics tells us that the more there is of a commodity, the less valuable it becomes. This is also true of money: The dollar is worth 4 cents of what it was when the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. Every day, every dollar we hold is devalued. We pay an "inflation tax" without even realizing it because we are forced by a falling dollar to pay more for goods and services"

I find fault more with the people that got them themselves into the mortage mess than the bank, the Fed or the government. Personal responsibility


Edited to add: It is not just a right-wing people that have tried to get rid of The Federal Reserve last time it was (Dem) President Kennedy June 4th, 1963

Banks actually control their own money, it isn't the Fed. Gold has worth because we say it has worth. The dollar has worth because we say it has worth. Being backed by gold isn't going to change a thing. You would also need to consider the cost of such an acquisition. Exactly how high are you willing to see the deficit go? All that, and it wouldn't change a thing.

The value of the dollar is dropping right now for one simple reason. The United States is not a good place for other countries to invest their wealth. We have a massive deficit which continues to increase.

The mortgage mess is far more complex than you realize. Most of the growth in our economy during the last 8 years has come from 2 sectors; defense spending and the housing market. Almost all of the growth was from the purchase of second homes. No, these weren't vacation homes but houses bought by speculators. Quite a few of these houses were bought with no down payment and banks were only too willing to extend these borrowers second mortgages on top of their 100% loans. The houses that these loans secure are worth less now than the original mortgage amount.

The subprime market has been around forever. It's riskier but produced higher profits. Some people move in and out of this market. Adjustable rate mortgages should never have been introduced into the subprime market. A particularly insidious new type of mortgage instrument, the Option ARM, was introduced. I honestly don't think that prime or subprime borrowers understood the terms of these loans. Because 74% of the borrowers chose the lowest payment option, their loans have amortized negatively.
They now owe more than they borrowed. They cannot sell their houses either because they owe far more than their houses are worth.

You would think that it would be in the bank's best interest to work with the borrowers rather than take the house back but they cannot. The bank has sold these loans and guaranteed the investors that payments will be made until such time as these loans are determined to be in default. They have to foreclose in order to have enough cash to operate. And, the investors do not want to take a lower return.

With most of the interest rate adjustments ahead of us, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg.

Now you can blame it all on the consumers who took out these loans but the banks were stupid for making these loans.

I hope that I explained the mortgage mess well enough to you. One thing that I failed to mention is that this mess is huge. and it's heading towards the fan.

You are right the mortage mess is going to be getting worst. It really is too much to get into on the board..the stock market, people's retirement funds, etc.

You can have all the regulations and yet people will jump up and down to get what they consider "free" money. Americans have no idea how to live-debt free anymore.

In a free market you are still going to have inflation and deflation but supply and demand would rule.
There's nothing wrong with natural "inflation" or "deflation." The problem is when the money supply is manipulated to cause either, since that's when it's most severe. The Federal Reserve (Fed's) do control this by injecting money or by raising/cutting rates.
The market has to have corrections..but between the Fed's and the President Plunge Protection team they will not let the market come down too much or crash.
The people taking the risk in the market should be the ones to take the good/bad.,not the taxpayers bailing them out.

But the mess is only starting wait until the 401K troubles ..since "big" government has created laws mandating people to put money in it. Most 401K money deals with the stock market.

1913 Federal Reserve Act passed, Congress gave up its power to create its own money that it was given in the United States Constitution, and gave this power over to private Bankers who called themselves the Federal Reserve.

I always wondered WHY banks would write these loans.. once again it is "big" government. Banks have to follow the rules from the government and the Fed.

THE REAL SCANDAL

(Congress) "A 1995 strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to find ways to provide mortgages to their poorer communities."

"PERHAPS the greatest scandal of the mortgage crisis is that it is a direct result of an intentional loosening of underwriting standards - done in the name of ending discrimination, despite warnings that it could lead to wide-scale defaults.

At the crisis' core are loans that were made with virtually nonexistent underwriting standards - no verification of income or assets; little consideration of the applicant's ability to make payments; no down payment"

"From the current hand-wringing, you'd think that the banks came up with the idea of looser underwriting standards on their own, with regulators just asleep on the job. In fact, it was the regulators who relaxed these standards - at the behest of community groups and "progressive" political forces.

What you quote above is entirely false. The standards under the Community Reinvestment Act are quite rigid. Applicants must have the ability to repay. They can have had some credit problems but they would have to have been cleareds. There are absolutely no fees allowed, not even real estate commissions. This program involves is sponsored by the larger banks and might comprise 1/10 th. of 1% of their mortgage lending.

Banks did come up with the loose underwriting standards all on their own. It has absolutely nothing to do with government. Your assertions are absurd.

Logically WHY would any bank do something like this to themselves? Sure the banks tried to pass off these loans into portillos(stock market) and also to other banks. Please explain why MOST banks have the same trouble. This problem is not just a couple of banks.
There are 52 major banks right now that is in the negative, the Federal Reserve has not release the list.
Our government does regulates the banks dealing with how many loans to minorities... It is not strict the only way to let minorities plus lower income was to lossen the standards.
Otherwise unless you can prove that ALL these banks just dreamed this whole thing up I still think it is the "big" government hand in matters that should have been let to the banks.
There are lots of news article since the first Feb that are saying the same thing.

I never said that there was anything logical about banks making these ridiculous loans, but I can tell you with certainty what their motivation was; greed. No US government agency has ever forced a bank to make any loan nor have they set quotas for lending by ethnicity. The DOJ can certainly investigate cases of discrimination.

Why would other banks adopt the same type of sloppy standards? It's because the other banks were doing it too. While the loans were going on the books, investors sat back marvelling at the growth and the promised returns. And, because these loans were being made, real estate prices were skyrocketing.
The thinking was that even if they had to foreclose, they couldn't lose. So, developers developed and builders built. But, it's a simple rule that they broke too; supply has exceeded demand. How many people think having two houses is a good idea? Who fueled idiocy in lending was not poor people so much as speculators. These are people who bought houses hoping to "flip" them in a year or two.

These loans were bundled together and sold after being guaranteed by bond insurers. Yes, bond insurers are in trouble too. Once these loans are sold on Wall Street, they leave the bank's portfolio (no such word as portillo that I know of). The reason they were able to get so stupid is because regulations have been chipped away and chipped away.

Yes, banks have been that stupid. They've done it before. It's why we had the Great Depression and stagflation in the 80s. Japan has been in a recession for the past 12 years for just these reasons.

Since you already know everything, I don't know why I'm trying to explain things. To satisfy yourself, why not stop by your bank, talk to the manager and ask him or her exactly how many loans the Fed has forced them to make. I will anxiously await your reply. I would also like to know which government agency you believe sets their underwriting standards.

Yes, there are federal manadates to banks that is way Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act. You have to have x amount of loans given to minorities and the banks are graded. The banks have been losing money on this program. They have tried to soften their losses by hiding the mortages into other things, but that is running out.
To be honest there are some people that should not get a loan to buy something. There were very tough guidelines in place but someone came up with that idea that it was not fair to the lower income people. Then the Federal guidelines change to make the playing field more fair.
The banks that are still doing good are the ones that were able to do other loans and keep the subplime loans at a low percentage.

I never said I know everything but I have enough sense to start looking for reasons. To believe that a government full of corrupt people are looking out for your best interest is insane. I also do not think banks or any other business looks out for anyone interest other than their own. They are in place to make money.
Staying out of debt is very important.

Do yourself a favor and drop by your bank. Ask those questions and report your answers.

Anyone can find the answers by just searching online with google,
federal manadates to banks Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act

I deal with a small local (local people) owned bank,,not a major bank. This is run differently. We was asked to invest in the bank when they were starting it up. But most of my money is not there I have converted alot into actual gold and silver and keeping cash. I do keep several accounts open at this bank and with a local credit union.

Edited to add: that still most of the responsibity has to lay with the person that took out a loan, Personal Responsibilty only you should know how much debt is right for you and your situation.

Perhaps there's a BankAmerica branch in your town that you drop in on.

The Community Reinvestment Act is a voluntary organization of civic leaders who try to convince both local and major banks to invest in members of certain communities. If a bank chose to ignore these requests they might be picketed.

I repeat, there are no federal mandates forcing banks to make any loan. Let's do blame it all on the consumer and absolve these poor, beleaguered banks.

What is making the banks extend credit cards to high risk borrowers?

Banking - Wex

also this pdf link www.law.ku.edu/oldsite/jrnl/v12n1/johnson-m.pdf

and yes the blame goes to people that have a "Champagne taste on a beer budget"
Even with credit cards (you do not have to accept a card just because it is offered to you..or max. out the ones you do have)

People are responsible for themselves!

My goodness, you certainly are able to repeat those Republican mantras!

I'll close by saying that you could not be more wrong.

I do believe in smaller, limited government. The people that are usually voted in say they want smaller government but then only produce big government. Rebulicans have certainly lost their way, but there is a movement to bring back the basic principles. Things can be changed with hard work.

I do think most government plans come with some good intentions but what it turns out to be is something different.

People need to learn to take care of themselves and not have the government or anyone else run their lives. We are turning out a society where no one wants to be held accountable for the decisions they make. Someone makes a mistake by assuming too much credit, there is no reason why others should take care of their mess. Everyone wants to blame someone else for their problems.

I will close also by saying I am for personal freedom/responsibilty with less government intervention as possible.