Creditopics.com

Even if your credit cards are maxed out and you have a huge mortgage to pay off, you can still get rid of all your debt in about five to seven years - and begin rapid wealth-building - without sacrificing the things that matter most to you!

16 Responses

1. IChee Says:
   December 13th, 2009 at 4:28 am 1

   govt is a big ponzi scheme

2. conkiler Says:
   December 15th, 2009 at 4:04 am 2

   just like bailing out the banks would make money available for loans, both were crap and crominy

3. racists(dot)us Says:
   December 16th, 2009 at 1:07 am 3

   Yes. Yes it is.

4. Vlad Says:
   December 16th, 2009 at 10:14 pm 4

   It is what it sounds like, the rich pissing on the poor.

5. momof2 Says:
   December 18th, 2009 at 11:47 am 5

   a democratic controlled congress caused most of the mess we are in.

6. scaerdrys Says:
   December 20th, 2009 at 6:51 am 6

   You think trickle down economics is a Ponzi scheme? What does Socialist Security look like to you! You think my generation is going to see ANY of the cash we pay into that sucker?
   Peace

7. skypine Says:
   December 20th, 2009 at 4:52 pm 7

   Yes. And like all Ponzi schemes, it failed.

8. Insanity Has A Liberal Bias Says:
   December 22nd, 2009 at 10:02 am 8

   On the subject of debt… how much has the national debt risen in the last nine months?

9. McOldie Says:
   December 25th, 2009 at 2:46 pm 9

   Bush let every buddy he had take a huge hit off the American public. Wall Street got a gigantic cut of our money through 50% losses in IRA accounts, the bankers kept their jobs and their bonuses,too, and oil, took us for every last dime and then shoved the American economy in the hole. Last summer’s gas prices were the last straw that broke the average Joe’s back. Into the hole we went and Bush was “none the wiser”? Give me a break!

10. TB2 Says:
    December 27th, 2009 at 10:25 pm 10

    No, trickle down economics is the politically correct way of saying “piss on the middle class”.

11. Mark Says:
    December 29th, 2009 at 2:57 pm 11

    It’s worse.

12. Volant Says:
    January 1st, 2010 at 11:25 pm 12

    Yes, trickle down always reminded me of the digestive tract. It’s great at the top where the taste buds are, but by the time things trickle down there is nothing but smelly brown stuff at the end.

13. Racist Rats Says:
    January 3rd, 2010 at 12:34 am 13

    Trickle Down economics and a Ponzi Scheme are two completely different things. Trickle Down economics is a theory that the mass of the finances should be in the hands of a small select group, and by nature of commercialism, these people will buy things and pass money down to the lower class economies. A ponzi scheme requires a constant stream of people to pump money into an idea, to repay those that paid into it the first. A ponzi is closer to a pyramid scheme. Although the Social Security Program is about as close to a ponzi scheme if i ever saw one. Madoff even testified that he modeled his Ponzi scheme after the Social Security program.

    The big issue is deregulation. I aways say unchecked power is like an avalanche. You can’t stop it until it hits the bottom, ultimately destroying itself. Case in example: Bernie Madoff.

14. Mark T Says:
    January 6th, 2010 at 1:01 am 14

    You could say that.

    I certainly did. Used to be seriously in the Right. Now I realize that was wrong. All the certitudes, from national defense, to family values all play upon our insecurities.

    What bothers me is that so many people don’t do the work to look stuff up.

    I’ll give you a GREAT example from just this week.
    –pd-class/Default.aspx

    Everyone – left right and otherwise, is rallying around the idea of “protecting” New York and other cities from nuclear terrorist attack, by placing neutron detectors around the city at the various bridges etc.

    Unfortunately, any weapon in a lead lined box, or even in a steel metal tool box could pass by a neutron detector undetected. Unless everyone is accustomed to being stopped and having baggage thoroughly searched every time they enter the city, it’s unlikely it could work.

    An unshielded weapon certainly would set of a detector, but even if that happened – how quickly could surveillance or law enforcement be brought to bear on the offending car. How many false alarms before the police just stop pulling over cars that detect as positive.

    And implicitly it acknowledges what _6_ administrations since the fall of the USSR have FAILED to do, police nuclear weapons materials in any serious way.

    But we will fork over millions, hundreds of millions and perhaps billions on a notion of security rather than something which can work. And that’s what’s pathetic, nobody, not Republicans or Democrats calls “b*lllshit” on a boon-doggle.

    Neutron Detectors -

    In the case of New York, what about someone who takes a nuclear weapon on a boat from Connecticut or from Albany downstream?

    So it’s not necessarily the fault of politicians of a particular stripe. It’s not like Democrats are all that fiscally responsible or something. That’s pretty cold comfort I know, but that’s just the way it is.

15. Joey's back Says:
    January 6th, 2010 at 6:32 am 15

    Trickling down is what happens when there is an enlargement of the prostate. It certainly seems as if some overgrown glands got in the way of any meaningful development in the US economy.

    When I look at the fall of many great societies and empires, I shake my head and say that they didn’t have the wealth of knowledge that we now have at our fingertips–they could not foresee what would happen because they didn’t know what had happened to others before. What is our excuse??

16. Ben Says:
    January 9th, 2010 at 3:06 am 16

    Try eleven or twelve presidents, newcomer. Trickle down worked. Granted, it was a slower process as far as pay scales and benefits to employees, and rightfully so. If the labor unions were kept in check, China wouldn’t own our manufacturing complex today. Inflation wouldn’t have devalued the dollar to the point that someone making $5 thousand dollars in 1965 was consistent with someone making $60 thousand today.

    Whether it’s tax and spend or borrow and spend, it was because of politicians thinking they could buy their way into office or stay in office with irresponsible borrowing or spending.

    The Ponzi scheme was at its pinnacle when Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae offered mortgage money to unqualified borrowers that started the mortgage slide we’re seeing today. People like Barney Frank, Rahm Emanuel, and Chris Dodd were there in the beginning, or at the point when it really escalated. Do you see a common denominator here?

    The blame belongs to no one entity, and it belongs to all. No one factor is completely to blame. Finger pointing is only helpful if it is shown as something we don’t want to see repeated. Moving forward, if we are able to do so before 0bama is out, will probably not happen. If we are able to hold out until he is gone, we can then rebuild, if it’s not already too late.

Leave a Answer