What are you talking about? Obama doubled the national debt and his idiotic regulations cost billions for little gain.

@Trajan61 how's those earthquakes working for you? Tired of the fracking shaking your state to pieces? Maybe with those loose regulations the earthquakes might just shake some sense into you.

@Darthpug We haven’t had any problems with earthquakes. They have had some minor earthquakes in some areas but it’s not from fracking. It’s from the salt water disposal wells.

@Trajan61 Either you are ignorant of the facts, or you are deliberately lying.

@wordywalt you don’t know what your talking about. The fracking is not what causes the overwhelming majority of the earthquakes. Without fracking we would have very little Oil and Gas. The salt water disposal wells are what causes the earthquakes. If you don’t believe in fracking maybe you should be riding a mule or walking as without oil and gas we would be in a world of hurt.

@Trajan61 It is you who shows his deliberately chosen ignorance. Adjusted for inflation, the three presidents presidents who increased the national debt the most, as a percentage of the GNOP have been Reagan (with his "voodoo" supply side economics), Bush with his senseless Iraq War and beginning of an economic collapse caused by his policies, and now the idiot Trump. That statement is backed by real facts. YOur rebuttal has no substance or truth.

@Trajan61 Trump's tax cut more than doubled the debt that occurred under Obama's 8 years in office.. I am so tired of your b***. Google it moron.

@Trajan61 and where do the saltwater deposit wells come from? It wouldn't happen to be from replacing the oil after fracking would it?

@Trajan61 [earthquaketrack.com]

@mooredolezal, @Darthpug: It’s saltwater disposal wells. When they drill a typical oil and gas well in Oklahoma now days they are mostly horizontal going down to about 9 or 10 thousand feet and then turning horizontal and going for another 4 thousand feet or so. When they are done drilling they will injection about 3-4 million gallons of water into the well to loosen the rock formations and make it possible to get the oil and gas out. When they start producing the well generally all of this water will eventually come back out along with the oil and gas and they truck it to a Salt Water disposal well and inject it into the ground. Often they will inject 100’s of millions of gallons into these disposal wells. These disposal wells sometimes cause earthquakes but rarely does the actual fracking of the producing wells cause earthquakes. Keep in mind that these new revolutionary drilling techniques are what has made the US the largest producer in the world again but this has come with some problems. Some salt water disposal wells have to be closed because of earthquakes. But I’ve never heard of the fracking of an actual producer causing much of an earthquake. When you consider the thousand’s of producing wells we are actually getting along pretty good.

@Trajan61 Technologies already exist that can make the production and distribution of renewable energy economic and quite feasible. All fossil fuels and the extractive production methods are hugely polluting and should be discouraged with speedy public support. If coal, gas, and petroleum producing companies had any long term vision, they would see themselves as energy producers and would see their mission as production of the least expensive cleanaest forms of energy production and consumption the most desirable. But they have tunnel vision,

@wordywalt How many electric trucks or for that matter electric farm equipment have you saw running. We’re quite a ways off from that being economically feasonable.

@Trajan61 Evidently you are not aware of new energy technologies under development, such as production of carbon based fuels from cellulose without having to extract and add fossil fuels. And You need to be looking ahead, not backward.

@wordywalt Yes I’m aware of it but I don’t see it being used anywhere so I don’t think you know what in the hell your talking about.

@Trajan61 Very shortsighted of you. You will miss out on the wave of the near future. That is what being closed-minded will do for a person.

@Trajan61 oh so you are not aware that salt water is something that they use to frack to

@Antidronefreeman it isn't

It’s simple, higher taxes and more government regulations mean less jobs. So what are you rambling about?

@Trajan61 There you go again with the facebook style of communication. Where is your evidence? Do you have an education in economics? Please present your qualifications to speak on such topics with authority.

@kensmile4u I’ve been a successful cattle rancher for the last 40 years, not exactly an easy bussiness to be in.

@Trajan61 Congrats on the successful business. Your profile states a college education. What did you study?

@kensmile4u In college I studied History and Industrial arts but I have lots of experience as a self employed bussiness man. The democrats have virtually zero support among the Cattlemen groups as they generally favor high estate and income taxes as well as property taxes. Hell a lot of them, including Obama think people should eat less beef as they say cows cause global warming.

@Trajan61 See link 1 for a quick summary from the EPA which shows the sources of problematic green house gases. Agriculture is on the chart but you can see it is the least of our problem. We need to cut transportation emissions, electricity production emissions, and industry emissions to make the most impact. All of this means we need to change our energy sources to a cleaner solution.

I'm in favor of estate taxes if you are talking about the death tax. Because only .2 percent of estates were paying the tax. See the second link for estate taxes. Trump doubled the exemption so now only .0006 percent will ever pay this tax. IMO we need to put it back to .2 percent.

I am in favor of restructuring the income tax to create a higher standard of living for the lower and middle class. We can no longer allow 1 percent of the people to hold 90 percent of the wealth. It's not humane and not sustainable. See the third link to the wealth distribution in the US?

Why do you think Billionaires are lining up to run the country? It can't be for the pay. The only reason I see is they want to hold onto their wealth by controlling the law and the resulting power to keep the status quo.

[epa.gov]

[en.wikipedia.org]

[en.wikipedia.org]

@Trajan61 Higher taxes for people who have millions yet alone billions means more money for schools, road, and all other infrastructure. Means more money in the economy because now people will have to be employed in the country building and maintaining that infrastructure, means that it stays there and goes around unlike it going to some rich person who is only interested in hight returns and a new Mercedes Benz which is not even made in the US.

Thank you. I see this guy posting bullshit everywhere. He really needs to go. Is there any way to block someone so you don't have to see their posts?

@Trajan61 There are 6 million jobs going unfilled due to LACK OF EDUCATION!

@Trajan61 Let me make it even simpler for you:
Higher taxes + more regulation = less human suffering and death from a polluted and unsafe environment

@mooredolezal You can block anyone by 1) going to their profile. 2) look on the right side of the profile and scroll down till you see Block/Report. 3) Click on Block

@kensmile4u I owe you big-time bro.

@kensmile4u I wish they had had those estate laws in place in 2005. My sister and I had to pay over 600,000 dollars on a 3 million dollar estate at that time when dad died. Some democrats want to lower the amount of tax free estate to 1 million dollars and tax everything at 50% above that. That would put a lot of farmers and ranchers out of bussiness. The estate tax could change drastically If some of the left wing democrats ever come to power.

@kensmile4u [scientificamerican.com]

Looks like your days of raising cattle are numbered.

@Trajan61 I'm sorry that happened to you. Are you sure that you paid federal estate tax? Perhaps it was a tax levied by the state the property was in. If it was federal Bush was in office in 2005 but based on the history section in link 2 anything under 5 million was not taxable in 2005. Maybe this is something you should look into.

@kensmile4u No it was federal estate tax for the most part. Some of it was state estate tax.

@Trajan61 According to the Wikipedia link on estate tax, the modern estate tax was enacted in 1916.[46][47]. Where did you read the information that some Democrats want to lower the estate tax threshold to 1 million?

@kensmile4u They had a Democrat congressman from New York on TV one morning and that was what he was purposing. Hell the democrats have always wanted higher estate taxes as well as income tax.

@Moravian Pray tell what are we going to do with all this grass on this highly erodible land that is unsuitable for farming? You are wrong as we would have a differcult enough time feeding the world without utilizing those hundreds of millions of acres of grass. On the other hand I have no problem with 100% organic grass fed beef.

@Trajan61 One crazy Democrat does not make the whole party crazy. The same can be said for the Republicans. I don't like my politics bundled that way. That's why I'm NPA.

@Trajan61 Don't quite understand your point but did you read the article ? For the benefit of the environment and our health we need to be producing and eating less beef. I agree that organic grass fed beef is much better than beef raised on feedlots where the cows never see a blade of grass and are pumped full of antbiotics.

@kensmile4u There are quite a few crazy democrats and yes there are a few crazy republicans to. People like Ocasio Cortez, Bernie Saunders, Elizabeth Warren and the 2 Muslim congresswomen are very scary with they’re radical ideas.

@Moravian Humans consume soybean, corn, and grain products as well. BTW there are more humans in the US than livestock.

[statista.com]

Obama was a regulation nut who seemed intent on putting a lot of small bussiness’s under with his idiotic regulations.

@Trajan6 Twatt, actually right wing republican twatt.

@Trajan61 I'm afraid that just because you keep repeating the same thing over and over does not make it true.

But it feels true, though, and isn't that what really counts? (just kidding)

I knew it would. I just didn't feel like proving a troll wrong.

If that's the only comment you can think of, then you yourself are a troll and a cyber bully.

Maybe you should stop watching CNN and MSNBC.

@Trajan61 how do you know what she watches? I've never heard the words load of crap on either of those Networks.

@mooredolezal that's "load o' crap" and it is my opinion, not a quote from faux...????? How do you get there from what I wrote?

Environmental regulations may or may not be justified by careful cost-benefit analysis. But those regulations that are clearly not justified by environmental benefits are not justified by the fact that someone got a job from wasted money. That thought is quite similar to Frederic Bastiat's parable of the broken window. [en.wikipedia.org]

Obama intended to put all coal fired plants out of bussiness so what are you talking about?

@Trajan61
Who said anything about Obama?

@Haemish1 You brought up scrubbers on coal fired plants and I was just making the point that Obama didn’t consider them to be clean enough even with the scrubbers and intended to put them out of bussiness.

@Trajan61 that just supports what he said idiot.

It’s simple, less government, less idiotic regulations, a better environment for bussiness. Hell Obama was the regulator in chief and seemed intent on shackling bussiness’s with his idiotic regulations.

@Trajan61 So you must have love the sub prime housing crisis and now love that Donald has revoke the laws that would prevent it happening again.

@Trajan61 spend less time with your ridiculous unsourced posts and more time learning how to spell.

@Trajan61 anyone who think governing is simple is a simpleton.

Clinton had the best job growth of all Presidents with FDR second and Reagan third and Carter fourth and Obama sixth. Your theories don't hold water, especially with Trump and his massive debt crushing rich give away as companies start to contract and push sales overseas.

@Beowulfsfriend Clinton had a Republican Congress and worked with them.

@Trajan61 alright, fine. But why lie about Obama's numbers? FDR didn't. And, why lie?

So the sub prime lending mean nothing to you or perhaps you don't understand what happened there.

@Jolanta There were 5 sub prime lending crises between 1865 and 1930. (That's an average of once every 13 years). Congress (being not 100% brain dead) saw the pattern and put in place protections to prevent future sub prime lending crises, one of them involved not making loans in the part of town where home prices would most likely depreciate. Then in the late 1970's Carter and a Democratic Congress came up with the "Community Reinvestment Act" which was directly contrary to the protections adopted in the 1930's. The "Community Reinvestment Act" had no teeth, so the banks ignored it for 15+ years. In early 1995, just before the Republican Congress swept into power, Clinton and a Democratic Congress put enforcement provisions into the Community Reinvestment Act forcing banks to make risky loans if they wanted to merge or open up new branches, so they kick-started subprime lending. Then the 1995 HUD directive of (Henry Cisneros/Bill Clingon) forced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy up the risky loans, thereby creating a secondary market for subprime loans. The Democrats forced the banks to make bad loans, They forced public/private companies to buy up the loans. The banks made profits by issuing then selling the bad loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made profits as long as the properties increased in value, then exactly 13 years later (in 2008) the subprime lending bubble popped just like it popped 5 times in the 65 year time span from 1865 to 1930. The taxpayers were left holding the bag.

@BD66 Where are your data citations? Please provide evidence used for this comment!

@Trajan61 so what is your point?

Let me make it even simpler for you:
Higher taxes + more regulation = less human suffering and death from a polluted and unsafe environment

@Trajan61, @Beowulfsfriend because that's the only way they can prove their false narrative.

@BD66 yes and now Donald has revoked the laws that Obama put into place about this

@Jolanta Obama did not put a single law in place to prevent subprime lending. Trump has done nothing to encourage subprime lending.

@kensmile4u Google "Subprime Lending Crises" "Redlining" "Community Reinvestment Act" "1995 HUD Directive" All that material is readily available on Wikipedia and other sources.

@BD66 I have looked at historic bubble data and came away with an 18 year cycle which changes all of your political assertions. That's why I asked. I will check your links and recalculate as necessary.

@kensmile4u The economy goes through cycles that typically last 6 to 7 years. It takes on average 2 of those cycles to create a subprime bubble, then that bubble pops and we get the same messes we had in 1929 and 2008.

@BD66 I've looked at the data and came to the conclusion there is no precise consistent recessive cycle. Anyone who has studied economics knows there are too many external factors that can push an economy into contraction. There have been some other attempts to describe a numbered cycle as shown in link 1 but even this article relies heavily on external factors such as war.

I read the summary of the subprime mortgage crisis in Wikipedia which you mentioned. I have provided it here in link 2. I think it was a thorough and trustworthy source. I did notice you left a few things out namely how the republican party contributed to the problem. I don't know if you did this intentionally but the result was a somewhat politicized comment on your part. So I'll just add what you skipped in order to show the 2008 recession was a bipartisan economic disaster.

First, the Glass-Steagall Act was enacted after the Great Depression. It separated commercial banks and investment banks, in part to avoid potential conflicts of interest between the lending activities of the former and rating activities of the latter. The sponsors of both the Banking Act of 1933 and the Glass–Steagall Act of 1932 were southern Democrats: Senator Carter Glass of Virginia (who in 1932 had been in the House, Secretary of the Treasury, or in the Senate, for the preceding 30 years), and Representative Henry B. Steagall of Alabama.

After the Community Reinvestment Act was established in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter, In 1982, during President Reagan's administration, Congress passed the Alternative Mortgage Transactions Parity Act (AMTPA), which allowed non-federally chartered housing creditors to write adjustable-rate mortgages. This bi-partisan legislation was, according to the Urban Institute, intended to "increase the volume of loan products that reduced the up-front costs to borrowers in order to make homeownership more affordable."[235] Among the new mortgage loan types created and gaining in popularity in the early 1980s were adjustable-rate, option adjustable-rate, balloon-payment and interest-only mortgages. Subsequent widespread abuses of predatory lending occurred with the use of adjustable-rate mortgages.[41][236] Approximately 90% of subprime mortgages issued in 2006 were adjustable-rate mortgages.

Congressional efforts to "repeal the Glass–Steagall Act" culminated in the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms. This bill was signed by President Bill Clinton.

In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation warned of an "epidemic" in mortgage fraud, an important credit risk of nonprime mortgage lending, which, they said, could lead to "a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis".[131][132][133][134] Despite this, the G.W. Bush administration prevented states from investigating and prosecuting predatory lenders by invoking a banking law from 1863 "to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative.

After the market crash on 13 February 2008, President George W. Bush signed into law a $168 billion economic stimulus package, mainly taking the form of income tax rebate checks mailed directly to taxpayers.[375] Checks were mailed starting the week of 28 April 2008. However, this rebate coincided with an unexpected jump in gasoline and food prices. This coincidence led some to wonder whether the stimulus package would have the intended effect, or whether consumers would simply spend their rebates to cover higher food and fuel prices.

On 17 February 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, an $787 billion stimulus package with a broad spectrum of spending and tax cuts.[376] Over $75 billion of the package was specifically allocated to programs which help struggling homeowners. This program is referred to as the Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.[377] The U.S. government continued to run large deficits post-crisis, with the national debt rising from $10.0 trillion as of September 2008 to $16.1 trillion by September 2012. The debt increases were $1.89 trillion in fiscal year 2009, $1.65 trillion in 2010, $1.23 trillion in 2011, and $1.26 trillion in 2012.[

President Obama also signed into law on May 20, 2009, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, creating the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. The Commission was established to examine the causes, domestic and global, of the current financial and economic crisis in the United States. During the course of its investigation, the ten person bipartisan committee reviewed millions of pages of documents, interviewed more than 700 witnesses, and held 19 days of public hearings in New York, Washington, D.C., and communities across the country that were hit hard by the crisis. The final report presents the Commission’s findings and conclusions and also contains 126 pages of dissenting views.

The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub.L. 111–203, H.R. 4173, commonly referred to as Dodd–Frank) was signed into United States federal law by US President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010.[1] Passed in response to the 2008 global financial crisis, the Act brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in the nation since the regulatory reform that came following the Great Recession.[2][3][4][5] It made changes in the American financial regulatory environment affecting all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation's financial services industry.[6][7]

On June 8, 2017, the Republican-led House passed the Financial CHOICE Act, which, if enacted, would roll back many of the provisions of Dodd–Frank. In June 2017 the Senate was crafting its own reform bill.[13][14]
On March 14, 2018, the Senate passed a bill by a 67 to 31 vote, easing financial regulations and reducing oversight for banks with assets below $250 billion.[15][16][17] The law passed the House of Representatives on May 22, 2018 in a 258–159 vote.[18] The legislation was then signed into law by President Donald Trump on May 24, 2018.[19]

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana...

[businessinsider.com]

[en.wikipedia.org]

@kensmile4u That's quite a response. It's by far the most well researched response I have received in my 16 months at agnostic.com. I'm busy with my business, taxes, and kids for the next 3 days, so it will take me a while to get back to you on this.