Speaker Pelosi's Bailout Deception - September 2008

[Gracelandification]

Clinton didn't leave a surplus but a $1.4 trillion debt over eight years. He borrowed from Social Security, part of a $115 Trillion unfunded liability, to make it seem he left a surplus. See my about me for links.

.

Allen West 2012

[VParker21]

Also I must add, that you cite the AICPA, however the Securities Act of 1933 was for the private financial markets. Meaning...stocks we are investing in and the sale of stocks and securities. She is not giving investment advice so I laugh at whoever made this video because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about and that you are quick to cite law and publications which don't even coincide. Just an FYI the GAO (Government Accountability Office) is where u want to cite =)

[EichhornsSuperZoe]

@VParker21 Revealing the tactic of deception, not the applying laws to the Speaker, is the point. The CBO included 11 pages of uncertainties about the projection, including the budget could return to deficits without any fiscal policy changes by President Bush. Pelosi knowingly used the well understood, and illegal in the private sector, tactic of deception with a projection. Apparently you do not think tactics of deception have any ethical implications.

[reportcard2000]

@VParker21 Revealing the tactic of deception, not the applying laws to the Speaker, is the point. The CBO included 11 pages of uncertainties about the projection, including the budget could return to deficits without any fiscal policy changes by President Bush. Pelosi knowingly used the well understood, and illegal in the private sector, tactic of deception with a projection. Apparently you do not think tactics of deception have any ethical implications.

[VParker21]

Let's just for example you invest in a Certificate of Deposit. It's for 10 years. You get a set return of 7%. However, 5 years down the line you close the account because you needed it to pay for school. That estimated amount that you were supposed to get...is no longer there. BUT...you were supposed to get it! It's because no one can predict the future.

[VParker21]

Second, what she is referencing is futures and the future state. Anyone in finance can tell you that 1. Any investment over a long period of time contains risk. The higher the length, the higher the risk. This was a prediction over 10 years. Thus, why you read that there were "fuzzy numbers" that were "intentionally fuzzy" because they can predict 10 years from. Let's just for example you invest in a Certificate of Deposit. It's for 10 years. You get a set return of 7%.

[reportcard2000]

@VParker21 The CBO was clear in the projection that it was not a "prediction." In fact the CBO put the probability of the $5.6 trillion surplus occurring at around 10%.

[VParker21]

She was not being deceptive if she was using numbers from the CBO. They have actuaries, financeers, and accountants looking and working with those numbers.

[reportcard2000]

@VParker21 The CBO is controlled by laws passed by congress. Please read the 2001 CBO projection and you will learn about the process.

[VParker21]

Um I love this how this is referencing the AICPA. First.. there is a HUGE difference between United States GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) and Government Accounting. They are completely different standards because they are for 2 completely different industries. The government does not operate in the same manner that the private financial institutions do. However, the government can regulate how the financial markets operate.

[reportcard2000]

@VParker21 Deceptive tactics is being discussed, not the application of laws to government officials. Implying the CBO said there would be a $5.6 trillion budget surplus in 10 years is a gross distortion of the 160 page 2001 CBO projection. I suggest you read the 5 page summary. Then read the Ethics for Government Service, which do apply to government officials, and let us know if the wanton distortion of the CBO report is a violation of said ethics.

[aschmirler10]

I agree with you on this! I was talking to a relative, who stated that it all had started back in 1999 when Bill Clinton "loosened" the regulation of the Financial System, allowing lower income people to get loans, who could not afford them. Therefore, he did this to get these people to vote for him & his party. But the media will not tell you this!

[Masonictoaster9]

The democrats caused this depression and then blame it all on bush. Hippocrit and liars rings a bell. Mommie socialistas want to save the world, but then they don't want to pay for it. Then they blame the man - Bush, how typical.