Paying my neighbors bills.

[Gunnen4u]

I think I figured it out already, but thanks.

I've seen retards like Truth before on other forums. All the same really.

And what is with the "your *****" ghetto-speak?

 

[Care4all]

YOu said that it keeps the people from losing theie house if its already on the way to forclosure?

Well the same thing applies to that. I dont feel I should have to help them. I didnt purchase the house on a low income. I live in my means.

You make it sound like i dont give a shit about people, but i just dont feel I should have to HELP people from there homes going under. Again...i didnt buy it.

again, you are not paying for anything that is being done now, that money is being borrowed from china, japan, saudi arabia....

if your ***** is that you are going to have to start paying for it 10 or 20 years from now....then your ***** would be correct.......

We will all be paying for it when the government funding of expanded state entitlements run out. you will see your local and state taxes rise and you will be allowed to keep even less of what you earn in the name of stimulus.

ONLY if the stimulus and bailouts DO NOT WORK enough to bring in more taxes through a better economy, than they would if they let this mess fall until it hits bottom with no help.

the reduced tax revenues from a down and dirty economy, with no intervention could still be bringing the same level of deficit spending and debt....

no one will ever know on that.....

 

[Gunnen4u]

Uh, yes, some people will know.

There are entire economic theories based around knowing.

Reduced tax revenues? Ok, try reduced tax spending. ******* Christ.

So you think we need bailouts to up the economy so more tax revenue will be availible so the gov't can keep spending? Or you actually think we're going to pay off the bailout someday in the next 40 years?

 

[Harry Dresden]

HAS NOTHING to do with my party. I AM Republican, but that doesnt mean i agree with EVERYTHING they do. I just simply dont agree with Obama MAKING me pay for other peoples bills.

and you are 100% correct.. no one should be forced to pay for other people's stupidity..

except Truth.....he thinks we all should.....

 

[Care4all]

YOu said that my "*****" would be right.

You can honestly say that your okay with upping your taxes because someone made the decision to live out of there means?

Rachel, you do not understand this whole mess....it is way too complicated than just as you put it, regarding the helping of people to stay in their homes.....this IS NOT the only thing that caused us to fall to our knees and in to this depression...

Now, regarding me minding if i pay to help those being foreclosed on, which indirectly is HELPING THE BANKS that irresponsibly loaned this money to people who could not afford to pay it back soley for greed and the instant BUCK...which was not good business practice...

My husband and I own our home. We paid cash for it 2 years ago.

My home is now worth LESS than we paid for it....and every day that passes my home is worth less than the previous day.

This is happening because people's homes are being foreclosed on which is putting alot more homes on to the market place....this makes the prices go down for the homes we own...

More than 60% of the very people paying their mortgages on time are now UNDER WATER on their homes....this means that their mortgages that they got to buy their homes, with the bank's appraiser determining the value of their homes, are worth LESS on the market than their mortgages are on these homes.

This has made other people, just walk away from these homes and mortgages because why should you pay $50,000 more for the home on a mortgage than what the home is actually worth....

Then on top of this, you have people that have been paying their mortgages on time, but now have lost their jobs, and knowing that their mortgages are also for more money than their homes are worth and are struggling already, are also walking away from their homes...

all of this putting more and more homes in to foreclosure...putting more and more homes empty on the market....

making homes drop in value even more...

leading to 75% of our homes being worth less than what people owe on their mortgages....it is a vicious downfall, with no stopping it....

sooooooo, i do not mind if the gvt helps people refinance their homes so they can stay in them....

it will help me, INDIRECTLY, by keeping the value of my investment in my home, from continuing its fall in value....

there has never been an economic recovery without a recovery in the housing market....this is what we should have been focused on all along, instead of giving TRILLIONS to the banks and financial institutions and insurance icompanies and billions in stimulus imo, and no where else.

Care

 

[GHook93]

Yet, care, the same laws and mechanisms are in place to allow under qualified people to obtain loans AGAIN

REALLY, where did you get that from? Call a lender and ask for a subprime loan. See what they say. Then ask for a no money down loan. See what they say. Then tell them you want to state your income! See what happens! She state you want an ARM. The rates on ARMs are higher than 30 yr fixed.

Place the blame where-ever you want put it was the grand scheme of the lender who came up with highly flawed underwriter criteria. You can going to ***** and scream that the lenders were forced to give subprime loans or stated loans! Yet local community banks and credit unions didn't give these types of loans. Rather they stated very conservative! Back during the boom after I discovered that Ameriquest was evil I got a job at a local bank (mainly because I got a base). Their loan porfolio only included 10 yr, 20, 25 and 30 yr fixed rate mortgage, no ARMs or balloons. Purchased required 80% down normally, but they would stretch it on case to case basis to 90%. No stated, full doc only. Origination so hard at this place that I left. Look that this bank now. Walk into it. Its flooded with application and they actually have money to lend.

Not to mention that this is not a job of the government.... if home values go down, they go down... it is a risk like anything else you purchase.. if people get foreclosed upon because poor decisions were made, they get foreclosed upon.. if some banks have to be bought out or sell off their accounts and go out of business, so be it

I agree that its not the job of the government, but we are in a unique situation.

The government does not exist to bail you out of consequences to your choices and actions... neither does it exist to do it for a private corporation or company..

I agree!

 

[Care4all]

Uh, yes, some people will know.

There are entire economic theories based around knowing.

Reduced tax revenues? Ok, try reduced tax spending. ******* Christ.

So you think we need bailouts to up the economy so more tax revenue will be availible so the gov't can keep spending? Or you actually think we're going to pay off the bailout someday in the next 40 years?

nope, just repeating the theory of how it is suppose to work....according to some...

I don't know either way...

so you are suggesting that the govt retract spending, cut it off, during a recession and that will help us more?

 

[Rachael]

Ive asked the same question a couple of times. But CARE: Do you think your responsible to pay your neighbors bills knowing that they made the decision to live outside of there means???

 

[Skull Pilot]

again, you are not paying for anything that is being done now, that money is being borrowed from china, japan, saudi arabia....

if your ***** is that you are going to have to start paying for it 10 or 20 years from now....then your ***** would be correct.......

We will all be paying for it when the government funding of expanded state entitlements run out. you will see your local and state taxes rise and you will be allowed to keep even less of what you earn in the name of stimulus.

ONLY if the stimulus and bailouts DO NOT WORK enough to bring in more taxes through a better economy, than they would if they let this mess fall until it hits bottom with no help.

the reduced tax revenues from a down and dirty economy, with no intervention could still be bringing the same level of deficit spending and debt....

no one will ever know on that.....

do you not understand that if there are any increased revenues that they will be sucked into the black hole of expanded state and federal entitlements that will have to be paid for in perpetuity? Government programs are NEVER cut only expanded.

And that's assuming the "stimulus " will work. if it doesn't, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will (Japan as an example), we will still have to pay for an ever expanding, ever more expensive, ever more intrusive, ever more corrupt government.

 

[Gunnen4u]

Cafe4All, the gov't should have retracted spending years ago, yes that is what I am saying. Allows more money to stay in tax payers pocketbooks, which means more spending perhaps?

If you don't understand basic economics, don't ******* add your -4 cents in this thread.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Uh, yes, some people will know.

There are entire economic theories based around knowing.

Reduced tax revenues? Ok, try reduced tax spending. ******* Christ.

So you think we need bailouts to up the economy so more tax revenue will be availible so the gov't can keep spending? Or you actually think we're going to pay off the bailout someday in the next 40 years?

nope, just repeating the theory of how it is suppose to work....according to some...

I don't know either way...

so you are suggesting that the govt retract spending, cut it off, during a recession and that will help us more?

YES

but only if the government cuts spending AND rebates the savings to us via lower taxes. Then everyone will have more money to inject into the economy either by saving and investing, spending or any of a thousand other ways.

Why is it you think the government taking your money, only to put a fraction of that money back into the economy is better than you using ALL of that money.

 

[Care4all]

We will all be paying for it when the government funding of expanded state entitlements run out. you will see your local and state taxes rise and you will be allowed to keep even less of what you earn in the name of stimulus.

ONLY if the stimulus and bailouts DO NOT WORK enough to bring in more taxes through a better economy, than they would if they let this mess fall until it hits bottom with no help.

the reduced tax revenues from a down and dirty economy, with no intervention could still be bringing the same level of deficit spending and debt....

no one will ever know on that.....

do you not understand that if there are any increased revenues that they will be sucked into the black hole of expanded state and federal entitlements that will have to be paid for in perpetuity? Government programs are NEVER cut only expanded.

And that's assuming the "stimulus " will work. if it doesn't, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will (Japan as an example), we will still have to pay for an ever expanding, ever more expensive, ever more intrusive, ever more corrupt government.

like what skull?

 

[Skull Pilot]

ONLY if the stimulus and bailouts DO NOT WORK enough to bring in more taxes through a better economy, than they would if they let this mess fall until it hits bottom with no help.

the reduced tax revenues from a down and dirty economy, with no intervention could still be bringing the same level of deficit spending and debt....

no one will ever know on that.....

do you not understand that if there are any increased revenues that they will be sucked into the black hole of expanded state and federal entitlements that will have to be paid for in perpetuity? Government programs are NEVER cut only expanded.

And that's assuming the "stimulus " will work. if it doesn't, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will (Japan as an example), we will still have to pay for an ever expanding, ever more expensive, ever more intrusive, ever more corrupt government.

like what skull?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/congress/70143-governors-v-congress.html#post1060316

 

[Care4all]

Uh, yes, some people will know.

There are entire economic theories based around knowing.

Reduced tax revenues? Ok, try reduced tax spending. ******* Christ.

So you think we need bailouts to up the economy so more tax revenue will be availible so the gov't can keep spending? Or you actually think we're going to pay off the bailout someday in the next 40 years?

nope, just repeating the theory of how it is suppose to work....according to some...

I don't know either way...

so you are suggesting that the govt retract spending, cut it off, during a recession and that will help us more?

YES

but only if the government cuts spending AND rebates the savings to us via lower taxes. Then everyone will have more money to inject into the economy either by saving and investing, spending or any of a thousand other ways.

Why is it you think the government taking your money, only to put a fraction of that money back into the economy is better than you using ALL of that money.

so you think that it would be possible for our government to get rid of the trillion dollar deficit they were at last year, along with another 500 billion in cuts of spending so we can give tax cuts to stimulate the economy IN ONE YEAR ?

Where does REALITY come in to your scenario....or are you just theorizing?

 

[Skull Pilot]

nope, just repeating the theory of how it is suppose to work....according to some...

I don't know either way...

so you are suggesting that the govt retract spending, cut it off, during a recession and that will help us more?

YES

but only if the government cuts spending AND rebates the savings to us via lower taxes. Then everyone will have more money to inject into the economy either by saving and investing, spending or any of a thousand other ways.

Why is it you think the government taking your money, only to put a fraction of that money back into the economy is better than you using ALL of that money.

so you think that it would be possible for our government to get rid of the trillion dollar deficit they were at last year, along with another 500 billion in cuts of spending so we can give tax cuts to stimulate the economy IN ONE YEAR ?

Where does REALITY come in to your scenario....or are you just theorizing?

I never put a one year time limit on anything. YOU did that.

But here's a neat idea. Keep taxes where they are and SLASH government spending by 2/3. PAY off the ******* Chinks and then lower our taxes.

 

[Truthmatters]

Try reading the whole ******* thing you goddamn imbecile

1) It is a goddamn message board you ignorant slut
2) "Cases tied to individual bankruptcies and foreclosures are generally excluded from the report."
3) "lawsuits filed by shareholders against mortgage firms"
4) FY2008 FY2007 FY2006

Investigations Initiated 349 337 309
5) The types of investigations by the IRS revolve around wire fraud, money laundering, etc... and this is not showing that people were forced or duped into signing mortgages with fraudulent information or illegal lending acts, resulting in the foreclosure of their houses


You just randomly put up shit you find on Google without reading and comprehending what you just linked... you ignorant piece of shit... and the whole reason I am calling you out on it and not ignoring it is to show a new poster on this board the exact type of lying, manipulating, piece of shit that you are... you are a bastion of horseshit...

You are pwned

Illinois To Sue Countrywide Over "Unfair And Deceptive" Mortgages


Yes I thought that link stated the kind of fraud I was talking about and did read it only briefly.

This link provides the proof I was attempting to provide. Both loan recipiennts and investors are suing the lenders.

The fact remains that the loan companies duped people into loans.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Try reading the whole ******* thing you goddamn imbecile

1) It is a goddamn message board you ignorant slut
2) "Cases tied to individual bankruptcies and foreclosures are generally excluded from the report."
3) "lawsuits filed by shareholders against mortgage firms"
4) FY2008 FY2007 FY2006

Investigations Initiated 349 337 309
5) The types of investigations by the IRS revolve around wire fraud, money laundering, etc... and this is not showing that people were forced or duped into signing mortgages with fraudulent information or illegal lending acts, resulting in the foreclosure of their houses


You just randomly put up shit you find on Google without reading and comprehending what you just linked... you ignorant piece of shit... and the whole reason I am calling you out on it and not ignoring it is to show a new poster on this board the exact type of lying, manipulating, piece of shit that you are... you are a bastion of horseshit...

You are pwned

Illinois To Sue Countrywide Over "Unfair And Deceptive" Mortgages


Yes I thought that link stated the kind of fraud I was talking about and did read it only briefly.

This link provides the proof I was attempting to provide. Both loan recipiennts and investors are suing the lenders.

The fact remains that the loan companies duped people into loans.

the dupees are responsible, not the dupers

 

[Truthmatters]

There you have it.

SK wants to let the loan companys off scott free.

The law does not agree with you.

 

[Care4all]

do you not understand that if there are any increased revenues that they will be sucked into the black hole of expanded state and federal entitlements that will have to be paid for in perpetuity? Government programs are NEVER cut only expanded.

And that's assuming the "stimulus " will work. if it doesn't, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will (Japan as an example), we will still have to pay for an ever expanding, ever more expensive, ever more intrusive, ever more corrupt government.

like what skull?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/congress/70143-governors-v-congress.html#post1060316

those governors are doing some political posturing....

the article DOES NOT STATE how they will be forced to continue these programs...it doesn't even say how it is forcing them to put more people in to these programs....

it gives them more money for medicaid because more people will be on medicaid if they are earning less or unemployed?

as far as paying a portion of cobra for those that are unemployed and the governors being afraid to end this program 2 years from now seems DAMN SILLY.....so what if the program ends 2 years from now....hopefully, unemployment won't be as big an issue 2 years from now....?

they even said in the article they DID NOT KNOW how the stimulus was worded on these programs and are crying wolf before the wolf arrived imo.

wonder why the other 45 governors did not see it the same as these loons?

care

 

[Skull Pilot]

There you have it.

SK wants to let the loan companys off scott free.

The law does not agree with you.

UM they are not getting of Scott free as you say ( for the record I did not say that). the lender is stuck with a asset it cannot sell to cover the money it lent. I would say the lender or the entity that bought the mortgage did indeed lose.

And when bad decisions and poor business practices meet, both parties should lose and those who did not make bad decisions or poor business practices should not have to pay for those who do.