Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Eric Cantor

Gulo Blue

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2013
Messages
13,502
Just checking wikipedia to see what Eric Cantor has done other than politics that could possibly make him worth legit millions on Wall St. and now I'm wondering, WTF is a "Master of Science in Real Estate Development from Columbia University"?
 
Just checking wikipedia to see what Eric Cantor has done other than politics that could possibly make him worth legit millions on Wall St. and now I'm wondering, WTF is a "Master of Science in Real Estate Development from Columbia University"?

it may not just be what he can do for them, but what he already did.
 
It's not what he knows, it's Who ...and he know folks with money. Wall Street firms like folks with money and having them around.

I think Cantor is a douche.
 
I think it's timely to look back at his labor day quote from last year

"Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success."

not really eric, it's about celebrating the contributions of the American laborer. I don't know if there is a holiday for business owners and rentiers
 
I think it's timely to look back at his labor day quote from last year

"Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success."

not really eric, it's about celebrating the contributions of the American laborer. I don't know if there is a holiday for business owners and rentiers

so you're equating business owners with "rentiers"? You sure have a lot of socialist views for someone who claims to favor capitalism.

Eric Cantor is a scumbag of the highest order.
 
Last edited:
I think it's timely to look back at his labor day quote from last year

"Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success."

not really eric, it's about celebrating the contributions of the American laborer. I don't know if there is a holiday for business owners and rentiers

It's relevant, but there's still a distinction I'd make. He's not joining the ranks of the people he describes in that quote. Those people typically aren't found on Wall St. It's the phrase "job creator". Job creators are great, but when we structure policy to benefit financiers while calling them job creators we're mislabeling things. When people say "job creator", the image that comes to mind probably says something about what party you tend to align with. And either way, you're not right or wrong, it's just that the label gets misused so much, sometimes people say what they mean, sometimes they just want to mask policy designed to primarily benefit financiers.
 
so you're equating business owners with "rentiers"? You sure have a lot of socialist views for someone who claims to favor capitalism.

Eric Cantor is a scumbag of the highest order.

Labor and capital are obviously distinct entities, Cantor's quote made it seem like he thought labor day was capital day. his perception of the day was pretty much the exact opposite of the reason why the holiday was enacted in the first place
 
I think it's timely to look back at his labor day quote from last year

"Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success."

not really eric, it's about celebrating the contributions of the American laborer. I don't know if there is a holiday for business owners and rentiers

Do you mean rentiers or reindeers?

Because the holiday you're describing is Christmas, it seems obvious to me.
 
It seems to me that the liberals, the conservatives and the moderates are in agreement for the most part on Eric Cantor's douchebaggery.
 
Labor and capital are obviously distinct entities, Cantor's quote made it seem like he thought labor day was capital day. his perception of the day was pretty much the exact opposite of the reason why the holiday was enacted in the first place

My understanding of the holiday is that it was basically an appeasement/apology for the 30 or so railroad laborers that were killed by federal troops during the Pullman Strike in the late 1800s.
 
Last edited:
Wall Street guys are well known for creating jobs that employ people. whether or not these offset the number jobs they destroyed in the process... well, I'd say not.

Yeah. I see that perception as a problem. They only lend money to the job creator. The guy that borrowed it to actually build a company is the job creator.

the perception problem here is that Wall St is to blame for the recession and loss of jobs in the first place. Of course champ will never blame the government for anything (other than anything he can link to Bush and Cheney via however many degrees of separation) but it was Barney Frank, Schumer and their cronies that set the whole thing up in the first place. Congress literally made wall st create products for high risk borrowers to buy houses - even as John Snow was testifying that Fannie and Freddie were already WAY too big and needed to be reigned in. Barney Frank actually laughed in his face then pushed through legislation that made them even bigger. Greenspan also warned about Fannie and Freddie well before the crisis and McCain of all people, introduced legislation for tougher regulation of the GSEs. All were either ignored or completely shot down. And who were the main figures in Congress pointing the finger at the banks? Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer, of course. Then those scumbags (all of them, not just the dems) poured billions of taxpayer dollars into bank bailouts. After Congress, wall st is no more to blame than the American people who took out liar loans, interest only and floating rate products they didn't care to understand to buy houses they could never afford - even after they lost half their value in the crash.
 
Last edited:
the perception problem here is that Wall St is to blame for the recession and loss of jobs in the first place. Of course champ will never blame the government for anything (other than anything he can link to Bush and Cheney via however many degrees of separation) but it was Barney Frank, Schumer and their cronies that set the whole thing up in the first place. Congress literally made wall st create products for high risk borrowers to buy houses - even as John Snow was testifying that Fannie and Freddie were already WAY too big and needed to be reigned in. Barney Frank actually laughed in his face then pushed through legislation that made them even bigger. Greenspan also warned about Fannie and Freddie well before the crisis and McCain of all people, introduced legislation for tougher regulation of the GSEs. All were either ignored or completely shot down. And who were the main figures in Congress pointing the finger at the banks? Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer, of course. Then those scumbags poured billions of taxpayer dollars into bank bailouts. After Congress, wall st is no more to blame than the American people who took out liar loans, interest only and floating rate products they didn't care to understand to buy houses they could never afford - even after they lost half their value in the crash.

none of that is true. not a single word of it.

the policies you cite were not created in the 2000's, but the 1970's or before to encourage home ownership.

you can't prove any of this, other than rambling off the top of your head from whatever BS WSJ or Bill O'Reilly rant Wall Street had run to deflect it's obvious complicity and endemic corruption revealed in the crash.
 
none of that is true. not a single word of it.

the policies you cite were not created in the 2000's, but the 1970's or before to encourage home ownership.

you can't prove any of this, other than rambling off the top of your head from whatever BS WSJ or Bill O'Reilly rant Wall Street had run to deflect it's obvious complicity and endemic corruption revealed in the crash.

move along, nothing to see here folks. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

So John Snow didn't testify before the House Finance Committee and warn them that Fannie and Freddie were way too big in 2003 even before they were massively expanded (massively expanded AFTER they were revealed to have committed massive accounting fraud - or did that not happen either?) - even though he did and there is video of it readily available on youtube. Allan Greenspan didn't issue written warnings and give similar warnings during his Humphrey Hawkins testimony in 2005 well before Fannie and Freddie were massively expanded - even though he did and there is documented proof and video records of his testimony readily available on Youtube. McCain never sponsored any legislation in 2006 that would reign in Fannie and Freddie that was completely shot down by the Dems even though he did and it's in the congressional record.

EDIT - Also, these policies were created in the 1970s and apparently nothing changed in the 2000s according to you which explains why Fannie Mae's assets were $650Billion in 1999 and over $3 trillion before the crash in 2008. That all goes back to the 70s because that's when those policies were put in place and nothing changed in the 2000s like liar loans, interest only loans, etc and interest rates were exactly where they were in the 1970s and nothing was done to lower them and if they did lower rates, there was no risk they would ever go higher and reprice everyone's borrowing...

Nope. None of that ever happened and none of the video evidence of the testimony or the congressional records are real because Champ says it never happened. Facts are always meaningless when you can say things like "you can't prove any of this" even though I can or that I'm just trying to deflect Wall St's "obvious complicity and endemic corruption revealed in the crash." This could be your weakest post yet, and you've had some pretty weak ones.
 
Last edited:
move along, nothing to see here folks. Never mind the man behind the curtain.

So John Snow didn't testify before the House Finance Committee and warn them that Fannie and Freddie were way too big even before they were massively expanded (massively expanded AFTER they were revealed to have committed massive accounting fraud) - even though he did and there is video of it readily available on youtube. Allan Greenspan didn't issue written warnings and give similar warnings during his Humphrey Hawkins testimony well before Fannie and Freddie were massively expanded - even though he did and there is documented proof and video records of his testimony readily available on Youtube. McCain never sponsored any legislation that would reign in Fannie and Freddie that was completely shot down by the Dems even though he did and it's in the congressional record.

Nope. None of that ever happened and none of the video evidence of the testimony or the congressional records are real because Champ says it never happened. Facts are always meaningless when you can say things like "you can't prove any of this" even though I can or that I'm just trying to deflect Wall St's "obvious complicity and endemic corruption revealed in the crash." This could be your weakest post yet, and you've had some pretty weak ones.

The congressional events of the 2000s regarding the expansion of Freddie and Fannie were a bipartisan effort.

Frank only became the head of that committee when the Democrats gained the majority in 2006; the six years prior, the chairs were these two dudes Leach and Oxley; one was from Iowa and the other from Ohio.

What politician if either party didn't want to go back to their district and brag about his or her role in expanding American home ownership?

When Bush ran for re-election in 2004, one of his campaign claims was how much American homeownership had expanded under his tenure the previous four years; certainly a part of that was the expansion of Frannie and Freddie.

Long time posters to the politics board will remember this re-wind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8
 
This must be fake...

images
 
The congressional events of the 2000s regarding the expansion of Freddie and Fannie were a bipartisan effort.

Frank only became the head of that committee when the Democrats gained the majority in 2006; the six years prior, the chairs were these two dudes Leach and Oxley; one was from Iowa and the other from Ohio.

What politician if either party didn't want to go back to their district and brag about his or her role in expanding American home ownership?

When Bush ran for re-election in 2004, one of his campaign claims was how much American homeownership had expanded under his tenure the previous four years; certainly a part of that was the expansion of Frannie and Freddie.

Long time posters to the politics board will remember this re-wind:

I'm not blaming the Dems, I'm placing the bulk of the blame on Congress, then saying wall st and the American people are a distant 2nd/3rd in no particular order. BUT i will add that it was Frank who led the charge for the expansion of Fannie and Freddie and it was he and to a large degree, Schumer who shot down every effort to reform them when the Fed and Treasury as well as some in Congress started telling them in late '05 and throughout '06 that they we had a real problem with housing.

Also, I edited the Wizard of Oz quote in my previous post - what will you tell Mrs. Tinsel if she walks by and you're singing Follow the Yellow Brick Road?
 
Last edited:
Frank deserves his share of blame, no doubt. But it took complicit Rs for it to happen.
 
Back
Top