Question about the bailout!

[dilloduck]

are they forgiving homeowners loans in total?

only a total idiot believes this will ONLY cost 700 million the final figures will be 3x to 4x as much. what government program costs in under budget?

It' like a bank robber running through town with all of your money--just tossing it to the crowd--Do you think it should be theirs ?

 

[sealybobo]

but i think chris was talking about his representitive, but he rambles so much about things i can see how you might have been confused
my current congressman is Tom Allen
but he is trying to unseat Susan Collins(and doing a poor job of it) so he wont be back in congress after jan
and its looking like Charlie Summers(R) will be my next congressman

You guys are just talking points.

You say we ramble because we are giving you details.

Bill Maher is right. Americans can't understand complex stories with details. They only undestand sound bites. Like a dog understands 20 commands. You understand:

surge, tax & spend liberals, bailouts, socialism, freedom, 9-11, wmd's, cut and run, regulations....

but you don't understand the details behind these things.

 

[TopGunna]

They should allow all home owners to renegotiate their mortgages. If my home lost $30k, I should owe the banks $30K less. That'll give consumers more buying power and it will stop the foreclosures, so the banks won't need to be SAVED!!

So... what if I buy a house for $100,000. I then invest in the home - install new floors, upgrade the bathroom, add a garage, etc. Should I then have to call my bank, and let them know my home is worth $150,000 now? "Just let me know how much more I owe you for the upgrade I made to my own home. Thanks!"

Conversely, if I let the same $100,000 house deteriorate over the next year (not fixing the leaky roof, etc.), should I then be able to call up my bank and let them know my house is no longer worth $100,000? "My house isn't as nice as before, let me know how much of a discount that's worth."

 

[DiveCon]

You guys are just talking points.

You say we ramble because we are giving you details.

Bill Maher is right. Americans can't understand complex stories with details. They only undestand sound bites. Like a dog understands 20 commands. You understand:

surge, tax & spend liberals, bailouts, socialism, freedom, 9-11, wmd's, cut and run, regulations....

but you don't understand the details behind these things.

sorry bobo
neither you nor chris ever give "details"

and with the bullshit i've seen you post you are the last one that should be talking about talking points

 

[indago]

get on the phone and call your congresscritters. They all suck. I don't have a problem telling them they suck.

Journalist Edmund L. Andrews wrote for the New York Times 19 September 2008:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bush administration, moving to prevent an economic cataclysm, urged Congress on Friday to grant it far-reaching emergency powers to buy hundreds of billions of dollars in distressed mortgages despite many unknowns about how the plan would work.

Henry M. Paulson Jr., the Treasury secretary, made it clear that the upfront cost of the rescue proposal could easily be $500 billion, and outside experts predicted that it could reach $1 trillion.

The outlines of the plan, described in conference calls to lawmakers on Friday, include buying assets only from United States financial institutions — but not hedge funds — and hiring outside advisers who would work for the Treasury, rather than creating a separate agency. Democratic leaders immediately pledged to work closely with Mr. Paulson to pass a plan in the next week, but they also demanded that the measure include relief for deeply indebted homeowners, not just for banks and Wall Street firms.

At the end of a week that will be long remembered for the wrenching changes it brought to Wall Street and Washington, Mr. Paulson and Ben S. Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, told lawmakers that the financial system had come perilously close to collapse. According to notes taken by one participant in a call to House members, Mr. Paulson said that the failure to pass a broad rescue plan would lead to nothing short of disaster. Mr. Bernanke said that Wall Street had plunged into a full-scale panic, and warned lawmakers that their own constituents were in danger of losing money on holdings in ultra-conservative money market funds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alexander Del Mar, a graduate mining engineer, and appointee to several government offices during his lifetime, wrote, in his book Science of Money (1889):
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The vast and progressive populations of Great Britain, France, Germany, and the United States of America, who, every ten or fifteen years, are permitted to float upon the full tide of commercial activity, are compelled at alternate intervals to yield up a large portion of their profits in trade to a body of cosmopolitan financiers, "who toil not, neither do they spin," but who are enabled to control the markets of the world and turn its activities largely to their own advantage. These "squeezes" are fatuously termed commercial crises, and their periods commercial cycles. Some learned Economists have even connected them with the spots on the sun! ...the commercial community has been subjected to alternate epochs of monetary contraction and expansion, in which much of what it accumulates at one period is insidiously filched from it at another.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my own personal opinion, I don't like the idea of America's economic system being held hostage by "a body of cosmopolitan financiers", and them, and the two political parties that have enabled all this to happen should be swept from government. They are all a disgrace to America, and to all who work for a living.

 

[indago]

A poster on another message board wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am retired on permanent disability. I am more terrified of Wall Street trashing my pension fund and the republicans trashing Social Security than I am of being killed by a Muslim terrorist.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


I posted:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The group of "cosmopolitan financiers", and their enablers are as treacherous a group of terrorists as any that exist.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

— — — FINANCIAL TERRORISTS — — —

 

[WillowTree]

A poster on another message board wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am retired on permanent disability. I am more terrified of Wall Street trashing my pension fund and the republicans trashing Social Security than I am of being killed by a Muslim terrorist.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


I posted:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The group of "cosmopolitan financiers", and their enablers are as treacherous a group of terrorists as any that exist.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

— — — FINANCIAL TERRORISTS — — —

Yep, I gotta admit, with friends like our congresscritters we sure as hell don't need terrorists. mofo's that's what they are.

 

[sealybobo]

So... what if I buy a house for $100,000. I then invest in the home - install new floors, upgrade the bathroom, add a garage, etc. Should I then have to call my bank, and let them know my home is worth $150,000 now? "Just let me know how much more I owe you for the upgrade I made to my own home. Thanks!"

Conversely, if I let the same $100,000 house deteriorate over the next year (not fixing the leaky roof, etc.), should I then be able to call up my bank and let them know my house is no longer worth $100,000? "My house isn't as nice as before, let me know how much of a discount that's worth."

Let's say houses in your area went down an average of $20k. Like I live in condo's that were selling for $150K but now are selling for $105K. We didn't cause our places to go down.

I'm not suggesting we do what I am proposing. But if it comes down to th e$700billion option or my option, which one would you prefer?

My option will work. People will be able to sell their homes, they'll be able to afford their homes. This will put money out into the market and get the economy going again too.

The $700 billion GOP option won't fix anything.

So if you had a choice, which one would you go with? We are all Georgian's today my friend. LOL.

 

[AVG-JOE]

and a hell of a lot of people got homes that they didnt pay for.

Dude, NOBODY is going to get a free house! Get ahold of this one... it's important.

Foreclosures are still going to happen if people can't or don't refinance out of their bad mortgages and get behind on the payments. What the taxpayers are going to provide is liquidity to the loaners of the money, not the borrowers.

The theory being that the banker has a vault full of mortgages and loans he can't sell to raise cash so he can't loan an average Joe $30,000 for a new Ford truck. If Joe doesn't get the truck everyone in Detroit gets put out of work and there is rioting in the streets.

We, The Taxpayers are going to give money to the same clowns who made this mess so that they can loan it back to us at interest and keep the game and the sky-diving going a while longer.

The ONLY punitive damage to the thieves, NO BAIL OUT, requires putting all the Ford workers out on the street.

Nice choice, eh?

Personally, I think if we skip the bail out, loans will be tough to get for a while, but there is too much profit in them - they'll be back.

Let's take the risk on the side of capitalism and say "NO!" to the bail out!

-Joe

 

[editec]

I call forgiving a loan, giving. What do you call it?

they're not forgiving loans, Dill.

They taking the bad paper off the books of banks and assuming responsibility for payng the BOND HOLDERS.

Big damned difference.

So the homeowners are STILL encentivized to walk away from the homes, thus insuring the the paper is worthless.

This is the dumbest way to approach the problem.

They SHOULD change the terms of the contracts so that people can continue to pay their mortgages.

Yes, it would cost us something, but not nearly as much as if the people just abandon the properties.

Plus it helps keep the value of real estate for those of us who aren't in trouble from collapsing, too.

There is no perfect solution here, only varying degrees of badness.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I used to see the logic of tax breaks to businesses on the theory that those monies would be used for expansion and creation of jobs. It seemed a sound economic plan. Now we all see that the money was pocketed, jobs were outsourced, American jobs were eliminated and business continued to prosper. You're so correct... what a rip off.

Pit, some of those big business and rich dude tax breaks did go towards building factories and providing jobs... In China and Mexico!

Where would any of us build a factory - USA, home of environmental standards and higher wages and benefits required to fill the positions or Mexico, where you can dump it in the river and pay a guy $20 a day to do the dirty work?

God we must look stupid from space!

-Joe

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Now you see... this makes perfect sense to me. Undisputable logic. It just seems criminal that they should walk away from the chaos unscathed.

Thus is the chink in the Armor that is Capitalism.

 

[Ravi]

Thus is the chink in the Armor that is Capitalism.

You don't support voodoo economics?

 

[sealybobo]

um, thats one of your 2 senators

You remember 9 11 huh? That's what your signature says. Did you forget who did it? Where is bin ladin?

He doesn't scare us anymore so they ruined the economy. Now they will save us!

You are sooooo dumb.

 

[DiveCon]

You remember 9 11 huh? That's what your signature says. Did you forget who did it? Where is bin ladin?

He doesn't scare us anymore so they ruined the economy. Now they will save us!

You are sooooo dumb.

those that "did it" died that day
the master mind behind the planing of it was KSM, and he is in gitmo

bin laden, is the figurehead, and he is hiding in caves(if he isnt already dead)

and you call me dumb


that makes you a moron

 

[Ravi]

You remember 9 11 huh? That's what your signature says. Did you forget who did it? Where is bin ladin?

He doesn't scare us anymore so they ruined the economy. Now they will save us!

You are sooooo dumb.

Haven't you heard, Bobo, bin laden can't be captured so the Bushies have ruled that he is nothing but a misunderstood American lover.

 

[DiveCon]

Haven't you heard, Bobo, bin laden can't be captured so the Bushies have ruled that he is nothing but a misunderstood American lover.

a total lie on your part



btw, yes, i know you were attempting to use sarcasm
but you FAILED

 

[Zoomie1980]

Thus is the chink in the Armor that is Capitalism.

Believe it or not, there was a time, and not that long ago, the American worker actually looked up CEO's. Afterall, they were the ones that ensured the products the company made got sold at a nice profit, ensured money was spent to create new products and thus giving them good jobs with the prospects of keeping those jobs for years to come.

They had no problems if they paid themselves well, because the workers trusted them. The disconnect came when the ones who did a poor job, lost money, closed plants, sold the company to some foreign interest who in turn either closed it down or pared it down, STILL got paid handsomely.

What the average working stiff cannot tolerate is an executive still getting huge bonuses in time of great LOSS. No problem of them getting big bonuses in good years but NOT in bad years. I can't imagine the CEO and Chairmen of Ford and GM getting paid at all after the lousy job those pinheads did the past year.

 

[Ravi]

a total lie on your part



btw, yes, i know you were attempting to use sarcasm
but you FAILED

You responded, so there was no fail. You might want to get a smaller button.

 

[DiveCon]

You responded, so there was no fail. You might want to get a smaller button.

you failed at your attempt at sarcasm
pointing that out does not erase your failure