The Mortgage Crisis of the Mid-2000’s


Poster from The Big Short

The mortgage crisis of the mid-2000’s is something not easily forgotten for the people that had to live through it. When it did come to its bursting point in 2008, people were at a loss for words. Most of those people being in the industry whether it be bankers, stock brokers, investors, or shareholders. This led to large corporations and big banks questioning how much damage they may have caused, and if it can ever be fixed.

I am interested in the mortgage crisis since its effects are still being felt today. It takes an enormous amount of pride, selfishness, greediness and plain ignorance for something of this scale to happen. I had not known much about the mortgage crisis at the time of it happening since I was only 12 years-old. I learned about it through people’s explanations and through helpful sites like Wikipedia. As I became more intrigued, I learned that The Big Short existed. A movie based off a book with the same title explaining how something like the mortgage crisis and everything leading up to it happens. I know that the mortgage crisis of the mid-2000’s was as pervasive and ubiquitous as fast-food chains in America. The outcome of this catastrophe was undeniably tragic. Millions of Americans became jobless and the value of their homes tanked.

The more I need to research into is the long-term effect it had not only on the American economy, but also on the world economy. Also, researching more about the series of events that led to the crash would be prudent to understanding the larger picture of the mortgage crisis of the mid-2000’s. Learning about the events that took place before the crash could me an insight of if it could have been prevented and how to avoid it from happening again.



The Latest From The Feminist “Front” By Rush Limbaugh


Rush on his radio show


Rush Limbaugh has never strayed from expressing controversial opinions and he certainly does not hold back when speaking his mind on feminism. Rush claims that feminist leadership is very much so anti-male. He uses this first claim to then state his various views on why he believes they are anti-male and how they are hurting all men. For example, Rush states that nowadays males cannot even approach women without them screaming harassment. That is only one his points that he expresses from this excerpt of his book, See, I Told You So.

As stated before, the summary of this excerpt mainly focuses on the anti-male leadership of feminism. Another point Rush makes is that women screaming harassment all the time only hurts the real victims of sexual assault. He believes that labeling normal male behavior towards females as sexual harassment is ridiculous and egregious. Rush also states that radical feminist like to blur the lines between rape and things such as date rape. He thinks adding words such as date or acquaintance only complicates the real meaning of rape and the gravity that word holds.

Rush states that some militant feminist want to make the process of courtship illegal.He believes flirtation and seduction are far too often getting confused with harassment. I’m sure they are some feminist who would want that, but I believe most do not want courtship illegal for males. Also, flirting and seduction may be characterized by some, but for some females it is still a very real form of harassment they go through on a daily basis.

My Argument Style

img_1148I had an argument recently with my friend Frank concerning the quality and price of HDMI cables. He believed that cheaper priced HDMI cables were just as durable as higher quality HDMI cables. I countered and told him that generally speaking, higher quality HDMI cables tend to last longer and provide a better experience overall. We both came to an agreement that buying a medium-priced HDMI  cable would probably be the best optimal solution.

Depending on who I am arguing with, I will usually listen quietly while the other person speaks, and offer a rebuttal after I have gathered my thoughts and they’ve finished talking. This style of argument is the one that i employ the most when engaging with other people. On the other hand, arguing with my friends involves a much more direct approach. I can argue much more openly and about a broad variety of topics with my friends. Most of the arguments we have are pretty nonsensical and bizarre.

These two styles of argument that I use have definitely made me as a person more confident. I like to share my opinions with others, even if they are contrary opinions. Expressing my point of view has allowed me to come out of my shell and talk openly about subjects I usually felt uncomfortable discussing.

I think argumentation can be a great tool to communicate with other people. Although, disputes can end friendships and make people very bitter towards each other. I think it honestly depends on the people arguing. Arguments should be a conversation of exchanging ideas and different opinions.