jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (16 posts)

"1 IN 4 Mortgage Borrowers UNDER WATER": CBS

  1. fishskinfreak2008 profile image60
    fishskinfreak2008posted 8 years ago

    That's 25%, AN ASTRONOMICAL FIGURE IN THE BUSINESS WORLD. So again, WE'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE to being out of this economic mess

    1. Paraglider profile image93
      Paragliderposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      YOU'RE RIGHT !!  1 IN 4 is pretty damn close to 25 IN 100. next?

      1. Bovine Currency profile image58
        Bovine Currencyposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        1 in 4?  When did the recovery start?????  Almost treading water!

    2. Neil Sperling profile image80
      Neil Sperlingposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It will take a joint effort of all of us - Pioneering the next economy!

  2. MikeNV profile image80
    MikeNVposted 8 years ago

    That is what happens in a society that places value on perception.

    If currency was based on a real tangible standard... meaning it had actual value this inflationary/deflationary catastrophe could not happen.

    This is clear evidence that the Federal Reserve/Central Bank is a failure and works only in the interests of Bankers as people are forced into the debt model just to get by.

    When the debt model fails and people can not pay their assets are shifted to the Bankers who hold the title.

    Americans ZERO
    Bankers  EVERYTHING

    1. profile image60
      C.J. Wrightposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Sadly, most people have no idea as to what you just said. However many will demand that Obama or the "government" come to the rescue......In this case its a pipe dream. The "government" and therefore Obama is complicit with Federal Reserve and its fractional banking policies.

    2. profile image0
      Madame Xposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah. And it was good 'ole Tricky Dick who unhooked us from the gold standard. Worst move ever by any American president.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        Wrong again. Too bad. wink

        1. profile image0
          Madame Xposted 8 years agoin reply to this
          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Going off the gold standard is not the problem. wink

            In fact - you have swallowed the next step of the "solution" to the problem. Of course.


            1. profile image0
              Madame Xposted 8 years agoin reply to this

              Of course?

              Do you think it might be possible for you to speak to me with more respect?

              1. SparklingJewel profile image76
                SparklingJewelposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                Mark, don't play games with her...tell her what you are talking about as per the video you posted a link to...it is important stuff for Americans, everyone, to know...

            2. profile image60
              C.J. Wrightposted 8 years agoin reply to this


              I've watched the video. While I agree with it in principle, I have big problems with some of the assertions. Example, the vote tally on the Fed Res Act of 1913. In the video it leads you to believe that only 3 Senators voted. Thats simply not true. It is true that there was some parlimentary slight of hand going on, 27 Senators were absent. There was a quorum and majority ruled.
              Also the idea of comparing colonial script with today's fiat currency is not realistic. Comparing rural/agra economies to global/indus/tech economies is no comparison at all. These guy did themselves a diservice by "overstating". Fractional reserve banking is bad business. Thats the truth, it didn't need to be sensationalized.

              Finally its not fair to be so discrediting to Madam's comments. In regards to her comments on US Currency. First there are two milestones, one is the "Gold Standard", the other is "Nixon Shock". The former occured in 1933, the later 1971. The former has to do with restricting the printing of currency based on gold holdings. The later has to do with demanding gold redemption for currency held. The key difference here is that until the "NIXON SHOCK" the US Dollar was not a completely fiat currency.

  3. Lady Guinevere profile image61
    Lady Guinevereposted 8 years ago

    May I post your link to Face Book?  I am still listening to it as I type.

  4. profile image0
    jerrylposted 8 years ago

    Madame X,

    There has been a lot of misconceptions and assumptions about the supposed gold backed system.

    Gold and silver in the ground, are worth nothing.

    Back in the gold rush days, man could mine or pan for gold. He could then bring that gold in to the mint, have it melted down, weighed and assayed.  the mint would stamp it into coin free of charge. The man could then take that coin and spend it into circulation for things he needed.  Man's productivity was being rewarded, and that productivity was what actually backed our dollars, not gold! The gold and silver coins were just a symbols of man's productivity.

    Today, It is still man's productivity that backs our dollars, but sadly, it's not man's current productivity, but his future productivity.  We are forced to borrow to have a medium of exchange! Every cent we have in circulation has been borrowed by someone and spent into circulation.  Mostly through mortgages, auto loans and business loans.

    Gold never was and never will be the answer to our economic problems. I hope this clears things up a little.