Tom Toles by Tom Toles

Tom Toles

Comments (15) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Ira Nayman

    Ira Nayman said, 6 months ago

    But…having no plan IS the plan…

  2. Gresch

    Gresch said, 6 months ago

    Peaks and valleys….

  3. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, 6 months ago

    The banks LOVED the repeal of all the silly laws that made it illegal to loan money without making sure the borrower understood the interest rates and payment plans. The banks convinced borrowers to put up homes as security for loans to buy an SUV and a flat-screen TV, loans with payments that were far more than the borrowers income, payments given by complex formulae the borrowers could not possibly understand, so the banks got houses for the cost of a SUV and a TV. Which was Great! Property was transferred from the unworthy to the gentry who really deserved it.

    Until, with all the sub-prime money and no regulations to limit it, which was a great idea, and one of the best things Clinton did as president, the price of houses bubbled until it popped, and banks found themselves having loaned $700,000+ on homes worth $100,000- to people who couldn’t make any of the payments.

    President Obama did his best, with threats to gaol all borrowers who didn’t repay their loans in full, but he didn’t have enough gaol space available, and he was unable to get Congress to pass decent laws, like death for debt, laws our esteemed ancestors knew were fair, reasonable, just, and the only way to deal with a sub-prime crisis (at least those who lost money to the borrowers got an afternoon’s entertainment when the defaulters were publicly executed).

  4. Cerabooge

    Cerabooge said, 6 months ago

    Michael wme: I’m glad you’re still able to use humor in these situations. More and more, I feel like I’m in the last chapters of Catch 22. If I laugh, it will be like the laughter of a madman raging at the storm that’s destroying everything around him.

  5. Rx71Wm29

    Rx71Wm29 GoComics PRO Member said, 6 months ago

    Actually, after a cash strapped home owner defaults on their mortgage and other loans, the Banks would re-sell the homes to yet poorer families who would eventually default on their mortgage. The cycle would continue to repeat itself, thus making more profits for the Banks. There’s no profit in selling a home to someone who can actually afford it. No money to be made there! The so called gentry own the banks. They don’t need mortgages or home equity loans.

  6. SizeofaPea

    SizeofaPea said, 6 months ago

    The housing market can’t truly recover until JOBS recover. It is hard to pay for a house when you have
    JOB or
    Not literally, but if you have been forced to work a (NEAR or at) minimum wage job and had to sell your assets (as I did) and/or raid your savings and retirement when your middle class good paying job was eliminated (in order to give the CEO another figure in their pay/bennies) it’s hard to buy a house. And if the multitude of good pay for honest work jobs are gone in order to increase the grift to the very top then it’s even harder for the housing market to recover.
    I find it astonishing how many people will defend the massive wealth shift to the upper echelons while reviling their hardworking fellow citizen and their desire to be paid equitably for their labors. Somehow it is okay for the ultra-wealthy to demand more and more (for really doing nothing exceptional) while at the same time it is somehow evil and greedy for the working class, the producers in society, to expect to be paid fairly for their labors, to at least keep up with REAL WORLD inflation. Fairly as in equitably in relation to the income their labors generate for the business and at a level that allows them to be members of the market for the products and services their employers (slave masters in reality) purvey. Even Henry ford (hardly a kind, altruistic or generous man) was smart enough to understand that in order for there to be a market for his product he had to help create that market by paying his employees enough to be able to afford that product. And yes that meant he had to earn a lower profit, but even with that reduced profit level, look at the massive wealth he accumulated. Similar circumstances to the economic boom during the Clinton years. Perhaps a reason why the republicans still seek to destroy him, the economy and the average citizen willing to work excelled. Wages were forced higher by increased demand and limited labor supply. Employers had to pay more, but the basic principle was the same as in Henry Ford’s day. The worker had higher pay and actual discretionary income and therefore could buy more goods and services. With the disposable income from higher levels of pay there were greater business opportunities and business owners made more money from the increased level of demand. And it was about this time that the “Dollar Menu” was born too. Prices and inflation weren’t running rampant, the worker was paid fairly, wages were high enough for the average worker to have disposable income and they spent it. Because of this disposal of disposable income there was high demand for goods and services and businesses prospered (properly run businesses that is).

    But there was one fatal flaw to this whole deal, the employers did not have total and unfettered control over their employees. The Free Market dictated wages not the employer. High demand, low supply of labor forced employers to a) go without and diminish their potential or b)pay higher wages and get the warm bodies they needed to meet the potential demand for their wares. So with the invisible hand telling them what they had to do (pay higher wages) the employers were irate. They did not tank the economy, I’m not delusional after all, but the employers were not happy with the economy despite the near-unprecedented successes of their bottom lines. So now that we have returned to a market where the employer can suppress wages at will and still make a modicum of profit they will not invest in higher wages in order to reap higher profits and return to the days of the Clinton Era. Employers will forgo higher profits in order to maintain their despot level control over their employees. Perverse but this is the way the world is. Greed is rampant and if feeding that greed means taking (somewhat) less so you can assure that your employee has even less, then the employer will do so. I would assert that even if the employer only increased their income by 10% by increasing their employees’ wages by 25% thus creating a booming market it would be better for this country than the current state of affairs. But the ‘haves’ would see this as socialism, charity, giving to the undeserving and anathema to their goals of total control. Plus it would have the intolerable effect of maybe, possibly, remotely making President Obama look good. And God forbid they ever do anything like that.

  7. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, 6 months ago

    Housing prices are going up, so there is a demand.

  8. SizeofaPea

    SizeofaPea said, 6 months ago


    Sitting Presidents are always graded worse than they are after they leave office. But it is telling that you have to cling to anything to prove your point despite many examples being given of other presidents who were rated very poorly during their terms. You usually aren’t a one trick pony but on this issue you sure are.
    Ah, and by the way, no amount of polling will EVER change the fact that george w bush is and likely will forever be the absolute WORST president in this nation’s history.
    I am sorry your poll of opinion, not fundamental facts, disagrees with this. I am sorry that your partisanship denies you the ability to recognize the devastation bush has inflicted upon this nation or his legacies that we are still suffering under. I am sorry that CONgress has been so effective at destroying this President by being so ineffective at doing their actual jobs. I am also sorry that this President has been so ineffective at doing HIS job (getting CONgress to do the Nation’s business).

  9. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 said, 6 months ago


    Liberals tend to not like Obama. So you need to reclassify CNN (Fox News wannabe) and Yahoo News Poll.)

  10. comicsssfan

    comicsssfan said, 6 months ago


    I’m going to need Cliff Notes.

  11. Cerabooge

    Cerabooge said, 6 months ago

    SizeofaPea: well done. Both comments.

  12. MangeyMoose

    MangeyMoose said, 6 months ago


    Thanks, well stated. You spoke for me too.

  13. Kip W

    Kip W said, 6 months ago

    That’s trickle-down. The system works! Hooray.

  14. Gresch

    Gresch said, 6 months ago


    I think it is going to take a lot of bias Lame stream media to “falsify” the record to make Barry-boo look good after losing the top of the food chain position in the world…. and let’s not forget during his “reign” that his party controlled both House & Senate for Two years and the Senate both for at least six years…. Stupid is as Barry is….

  15. Gresch

    Gresch said, 6 months ago

    Well it would spend what the definition of is….is

    You have now been nominated to the William C. Clinton Class of Spin…

  16. Refresh Comments.