Tippmann Paintball Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > News And Views > Thoughts and Opinions
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

This really chaps my ......

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
Message
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: This really chaps my ......
    Posted: 18 February 2009 at 11:39am
Great, so now I get to pay for everybody that took out a mortgage for houses that they can't afford. What the hell were my wife and I thinking when we bought a modest home that we knew we could actually afford, even when we were approved for considerably more?? So now, I get to foot the freaking bill for living within my means. Man am I pissed.
 
Back to Top
Predatorr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Rules 1 and 2

Joined: 28 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Predatorr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 11:45am
Update, we are in trouble.
My macro teacher calls this Intergenerational Theft.  Basically, the government will issue bonds to pay for most of these bailout plans.  These bonds will be paid for in time by more bonds.  And more bonds.  So the debt really never goes away.  Unless, that is, somebody decides to tax everyone in America an insane amount of money. 
Back to Top
brihard View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Making stuff up

Joined: 05 September 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 10155
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brihard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 12:08pm
Pred, don't you realize that if your nation were anything other than the entity known as the United States of America, they would long since have defaulted on their debt and declared bakruptcy?

U.S. government isued debt is now a house of cards. The bottom card has been taken away already, it just hasn't started to tople yet. Your nation is bankrupt. A ten trillion dollar debt is an absolutely ludicrous amount of money. America has no business continuing to incur a deficit. The rest of the world tolerates it and pretends the emperor isn't naked only because the remainder of the world's financial industries are dependent on the masses blindly continuing to accept the fiction of the American-centric world financial order.

The financial practices of your nation's lending industry are equal in stupidity only to the fiscal policies of her successive governments for quite some time now. At this point I'd rather the entire system collapse and rebuild; we could have the world economy back on track within ten years. Unfortunately the world doesn't have the cojones to let the necessary happen.
"Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation."

-FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011.

Yup, he actually said that.
Back to Top
JohnnyHopper View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I.O.U. a punch

Joined: 15 June 2002
Location: North Chuck SC
Status: Offline
Points: 4664
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JohnnyHopper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 12:25pm
Same boat here. I'm also worried that my area may become a section 8 hell as the government doles out free homes that they bought. I'd rather face zombies than the random no warning crack attacks. It already sucks enough here with only a few houses and groups of young men standing around doing nothing from 11am to 2am. Thank God for the castle doctrine.
My shoes of peace have steel toes.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 12:32pm
They bought the houses that they knew were beyond their means, so they should have to deal with losing the house. It'd be better for everyone if they got evicted--- they'd moved to a place that they could afford, and tax money that could be used elsewhere would be freed up.

"But that will hurt their credit". Too damn bad, they were the irresponsible ones. Why should the fiscally responsible citizens bail out the ones that are not?


Now, I'm all for helping the people who got thrust into the situation, who are struggling to really try to do their job. THEY are the ones that deserve the help. If you got laid off and are struggling to make payments, then ok, you get help.





Edited by Linus - 18 February 2009 at 12:33pm

Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 12:38pm
I guess what makes me the most mad is that people who overextended themselves and live in nicer houses than me are going to get to stay in these houses and get their payments lowered so that they can afford it? WTH? Instead, why don't they take what they can afford, and give them the option of moving to a lesser home? People made bad decisions and now, I get to live in my crappy (relative) house while these people get to live in much nicer houses.. AND I GET TO PAY FOR IT!. So, because I pay my bills, taxes and cover my expenses without help from the government, I get screwed. Nice! Guess I needs to go buy me a big ole house wit a poach , huge backyaad and a tree car gayrage.  Aint gonna matter none if I caint pay fo it, cause da guvernmint is gonna has my back!
 
I think the worse part is that it is being taken from the 700billion Stimuloss that was done in Fall, so probably little if anything that anyone can do about it. It's a done deal. Statement is classic: "Obama said this change would come at "roughly zero" cost to taxpayers.". Umm, ok. Anyone want to explain this one to me?


Edited by oldpbnoob - 18 February 2009 at 12:50pm
Back to Top
tallen702 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Hipster before Hipster was cool...

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 11857
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 1:07pm
Originally posted by brihard brihard wrote:

Pred, don't you realize that if your nation were anything other than the entity known as the United States of America, they would long since have defaulted on their debt and declared bakruptcy?
U.S. government isued debt is now a house of cards. The bottom card has been taken away already, it just hasn't started to tople yet. Your nation is bankrupt. A ten trillion dollar debt is an absolutely ludicrous amount of money. America has no business continuing to incur a deficit. The rest of the world tolerates it and pretends the emperor isn't naked only because the remainder of the world's financial industries are dependent on the masses blindly continuing to accept the fiction of the American-centric world financial order.
The financial practices of your nation's lending industry are equal in stupidity only to the fiscal policies of her successive governments for quite some time now. At this point I'd rather the entire system collapse and rebuild; we could have the world economy back on track within ten years. Unfortunately the world doesn't have the cojones to let the necessary happen.




Bri, is the Canadian military a "don't ask don't tell" situation? Because I just might be gay for you after your last few political and financial posts.

Seriously though. He's right. The US has been living a lie since about the mid point of George H.W. Bush's presidency. Our market isn't actually down. It's where it should be historically. Our who financial system has been inflated for 2 decades to the point where the smallest hiccup was bound to cause problems, let alone anything major like the mortgage crisis. That bad debt needs to go away the traditional way, by dropping the value of the market to the point where you'd be insane not to buy. The problem is that rather than making the individuals who made the mistakes live with the consequences, and making the banks that knew better than to give them loans, but did anyway, deal with it on their own, we're bailing them out. All this does is bring the values of those of us who are smart with our money down to the lowest common denominator.
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 1:19pm
^^^^^ So I get screwed again.  Now, even though I have NEVER been late on my mortgage payments or other bills, due to bad loans by the financial institutions and the unavailability of cash, I may now have a problem refinancing my home to finally make some improvements. We have been putting these off for several years while we built some equity in our house.  Gets better and better.
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Crazy old guy

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 1:23pm
"Back in the USSA........"
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4910
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 1:47pm

Its only been a few weeks... Give socialism a chance will ya...

 
Its what we all voted for, remember?
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Forum's Noam Chomsky

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: Statesboro, GA
Status: Offline
Points: 12014
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 2:12pm
But Adam Smith!


Back to Top
Lightningbolt View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
PHAT and PLAT

Joined: 10 July 2002
Location: bumping up
Status: Offline
Points: 5055
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lightningbolt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 2:20pm
 Musical chairs could be a possibility?  Take people that foreclosed on houses that they couldn't afford in the first place and place them in another foreclosure house that fit's their income?  It could potentially clean the pipeline up a bit.  Just a quick brainstorm after reading the thread. 
Back to Top
Bruce Banner View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 August 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1128
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bruce Banner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 2:59pm
I am witholding judgement until I get more facts, but here are two thoughts:
 
1.  According to the press releases (as well as discussions during the election and since), the intent is not to rescue "irresponsible" homeowners, but rather to help responsible owners who fell on hard times.  I don't know exactly what this means, but I can imagine, for instance, aid to people with reduced income due to job loss.  Somewhat more controversial would be aid to owners with ARMs that recently escalated.  That would lead to discussions about whether ARMs are responsible or irresponsible, and so forth.
 
2.  Does it necessarily matter whether the homeowner is "deserving" or not?  From a strictly pragmatic perspective, we ought to do what we can to stop an economic collapse.  During the last year there have been two separate but related causes that are (IMO) primarily responsible for our current mess:  credit shortage and dwindling property values. 
 
When property values suddenly go down drastically, this has a very profound effect on the economy in many different ways.  We are all accustomed to some variation, but when property values drop 15% in a year, that affects all of us, not just individual homeowners.
 
Similarly, credit shortages affect all of us, even if we aren't borrowing.
 
Now combine the two and add foreclosures and increased unemployment.  When property values drop more than 10%, all of your "irresponsible" homeowners, but also a lot of people who were perfectly responsible, are suddenly owing more on their mortgage than the house is worth.  When property values drop 15%, a whole bunch of people are in this situation.  When property values drop 30+% (as they have in some parts), then a very significant chunk of the population owes more on their houses than they are worth.
 
When you are underwater AND facing other financial challenges, then walking away from the house suddenly seems like a good idea.  We have already seen a lot of this happening.  In the case of a walkaway, the property values just dropped a little bit more.  More importantly, the bank lost money.  That means that they now have even less money to lend for residential mortgages (or anything else), which aggravates the general credit crunch, and further depresses property values.  And so on.
 
So - we can stand defiantly on the bow of the Titanic in moral judgement of the guy that didn't spot the iceberg, or we can get a bucket and start bailing, even if that means helping the people that led us into the crash.
 
I have little personal sympathy for those that make foolish personal financial decisions.  I have even less sympathy for those who would allow our economy to tank out of spite.
 
I don't know if this plan will work, or whether we ought to do it, or do something else or nothing at all.  But I DO know that the correct consideration has to be "will it work," not "will some fools be saved."
Waste and excess are not conservative family values
Nature is not a liberal plot
A Good Energy Plan
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 3:15pm

Again, so because some idiot in Central Florida paid $380k for a 1500square foot house with an ARM, and the house is now worth $150k (where it should have always been), I am supposed to pay to bail him out? We moved from CF 7 years ago and the housing bubble started to grow after we did. I really wanted to move back, but one of the reasons we didn't was because we didn't want to pay the inflated prices and get into a mortgage that we could not afford.

Now if the bailout is to help people that may have lost their jobs... I am still not thrilled about it, but may have some sympathy. However, when they talk about lowering the value of the homes/amount of the mortgage to fit what the buyer can pay, this doesn't sound like it's going to be the case. Again, it sounds like bailing out people that should never have been approved for a house in the first place, or were over approved due to lax lending policies.
Back to Top
Mack View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Has no impulse! control

Joined: 13 January 2004
Location: 2nd Circle
Status: Offline
Points: 9906
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 3:15pm
While I am still mulling over most of what Bruce said, I have to comment on the part about "dwindling property values."  I view them more as normalizing to where they should have been all along before government interference in the market and easy loan terms artificially inflated the values by disrupting the balance between supply and demand.  Any government action aimed at maintaining those artificially high values (or that results in that) will only prolong the problems and perhaps cause them to reoccur.
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 3:18pm
Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:

While I am still mulling over most of what Bruce said, I have to comment on the part about "dwindling property values."  I view them more as normalizing to where they should have been all along before government interference in the market and easy loan terms artificially inflated the values by disrupting the balance between supply and demand.  Any government action aimed at maintaining those artificially high values (or that results in that) will only prolong the problems and perhaps cause them to reoccur.
QFT! I tried stating this before in another post, but due to my lack of eloquence missed the spot.
Back to Top
Destruction View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 August 2003
Location: Burundi
Status: Offline
Points: 3440
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Destruction Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 3:44pm
LEGALIZE
u dont know what to do ur getting mottor boatted

Men are from Magmar, women are from Venusaur.
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4910
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 3:56pm
So bruce.
 
Did the governments focus on pushing banks into making easy loans to give "everyone" the right of home ownership, cause this mess?
 
You know the community reinvestment act. sponsored by groups like acorn.
 
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 4:09pm
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

So bruce.
 
Did the governments focus on pushing banks into making easy loans to give "everyone" the right of home ownership, cause this mess?
 
You know the community reinvestment act. sponsored by groups like acorn.
 
 
Do not turn my thread into a Hannity regurgitation . Play nice or I will ask the mods to smite you with their God like powers.
 
 
Back to Top
Bruce Banner View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 August 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1128
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bruce Banner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 February 2009 at 4:10pm
Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:

While I am still mulling over most of what Bruce said, I have to comment on the part about "dwindling property values."  I view them more as normalizing to where they should have been all along before government interference in the market and easy loan terms artificially inflated the values by disrupting the balance between supply and demand.  Any government action aimed at maintaining those artificially high values (or that results in that) will only prolong the problems and perhaps cause them to reoccur.
 
I am not sure that is accurate.  The "correct" value of property is decided by the market, which considers all known information.  Property values were not "artificially inflated by disrupting the balance between supply and demand" - that doesn't make any sense, at least not in this context. 
 
Supply and demand both respond to a variety of things - including government regulation, and not just Fannie Mae lending mandates or CRA rules.  For example, if the income tax were instantly abolished and replaced with a consumption tax on everything except homes, the property values would skyrocket immediately.  Those high values would not be artificially propped up, but would correctly reflect the new economic reality.
 
If the home mortgage interest deduction was abolished, property values would drop (IMO this would have a far more drastic effect on housing prices than anything we have seen so far).  If a federal cap were placed on realtor commissions, property values would rise.  If the interest deduction were extended to multiple homes (without current restriction), property values would rise.  And so forth.
 
None of those property value levels would be any more or less "correct" than the other.  They would all be where they were due to the combination of all known and relevant factors.
 
What WOULD truly constitute artificially propping up property values would be a mandated minimum sale price.  Kind of like Manhattan rent control in reverse.  But that is not what happened here.  Yes, government action impacted the market.  No, that does not make it "artificial propping."  The government is a market player just like the rest of us, and the market responds to government action just the same as it responds to noise level, an extra bedroom or changing carpet fashion.  It is an illusion to think that the government does not affect housing prices.  IMO, Fannie Mae et al had far less effect on housing prices than a whole army of other current and potential government rules do or could.
 
Moreover, it is irrelevant.  Regardless of WHY this is happening, and regardless of whether we think the new price level is more appropriate , the objective reality is that fast change is bad.  It is objective reality that when housing prices drop a percentage amount greater than the level of equity held by many homeowners it is a very bad thing for the entire economy.  If we were going to drop, it would have been far healthier to drop slowly, or better yet not drop at all, just slow the rate of increase to below inflation.  Over the course of a few years, this would have gotten us to the same prices without the economic turmoil.
 
Change can be good or bad.  Fast change is almost always bad.


Edited by Bruce Banner - 18 February 2009 at 4:13pm
Waste and excess are not conservative family values
Nature is not a liberal plot
A Good Energy Plan
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.453 seconds.