idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
lol @ gbaji not getting it.
I suppose I should probably read the whole link, but based on what Demea quoted, it seems as though it's saying that in states that have weaker unions, weaker collective bargaining, and less Democratic Party influence, the cost to borrow money is lower than it is in states with more Dem influence, stronger unions, and stronger collective bargaining rules.
Isn't the cost to borrow money being lower a good thing? Banks giving folks a better deal and all of that?
Oh, wait! So you guys are trying to claim that the fact that it costs more to borrow in those states is because the lenders somehow magically hate unions and Democrats! See. It's right there in the darn thread title. Guess I should have looked closer.
Or... waitaminute! Here's a thought. Maybe it's more expensive to borrow in those states because the unions themselves, their collective bargaining, and the influence of Democrats and their poor economic policies result in increased operating costs being born by the banks and other lending institutions thus requiring them to increase the cost of a loan in order to make up the difference! Well that kinda explains things too, doesn't it? No... that's just crazy talk! Because we all know that lenders don't set their rates based on prevailing economic conditions. Obviously they base their lending rates on whether or not they like the people living there!
Whew!
Edited, Sep 16th 2011 1:31pm by gbaji 
