Sad day for America

Page 11 of 16  
Mike Hunter wrote:


Wrong. The care that people on Medicare get is much better than you describe.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 27/03/2010 8:57 AM, Mike Hunter wrote:

Hey Mike, I thought you were all for Obama bailing out every loser?
--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I never said that, my friend. I mealy pointed out the erroneous things you were posting about GM, big difference from backing BO.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are a funny paradox. You should seek some help. Pro-GM, GM is OK for pork and bailout. Supplid by Obama. Yet you do and don't support Obama marxism. Yet when it hits health care, you 180 degrees out of sync.
I know, liberals are a confusing bunch. But if you support GM, you must support Obama, as it is Obama Governemtn Motors.
On 27/03/2010 6:12 PM, Mike Hunter wrote:

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
So was bailing out GM, dummy

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bailing out GM will go down in hostory as a poster child of why this depression occured in the first place.
Too much corruption and dead weight on the system.
On 28/03/2010 10:48 AM, Mike Hunter wrote:

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 28/03/2010 11:41 AM, Tom wrote:

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Canuck57 wrote:

>

And not nearly enough oversight. The problem was not with GM or Chyrsler (although there were plenty of problems there), but the problem was with the banking industry and the way the US let them get away with so much crap, like giving loans to people who could not possibly give them back, and then repackaging them and selling them, often lying to the borrowers.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do you know anything about "netequette", top posting says no.
--
Clive


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree with this. The overwhelming desire to keep the snowball rolling is shared by Republicans and Democrats alike...and fueled by a consumer that always wants more than they can actually afford.

I'm not sure why you assign the '401k' to a Democrat philosophy. If anything, I'd assign it to a Republican philosophy while company pensions are more in tune with a Democrat philosophy. In either case, lets all be really glad that the government didn't succeed in getting Soocial Security funds into the stock market investing game a few years ago.

Not sure what this has to do with 401k. Americans are content to offshore jobs as long as the job isn't theirs and as long as the result will be cheaper products for them to buy here in America.

I don't know about that, but I am one of those that believes that a global economy is one of the best ways to avoid global warfare...and all the expenses that go along with destroying rather than building.

If there is a line in the sand where you can point and claim that America suddenly felt this way (as opposed to always feeling this way), I'd point at the 1980s, not the 1990s.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

I don't ascribe 401k's to political parties. It was the means to get many Americans to believe that the interests of Wall Street coincided with their own. That's a fairly recent phenomenon, and a fallacy. I note that many Democrats are for "change" - as long as it doesn't affect their personal 401k. There is a hypocrisy there.

Sure. They always think they're safe. Part and parcel with "American Exceptionalism." Personally, I never felt I was better than a Chinaman. And here we are. Content?

Global economy and keeping one's own infrastructure and job market strong are not incompatible. Our politicians and policy makers couldn't manage that.

Perhaps you're right. I noticed it more in the '90's. On magazine covers mostly. First time pure pencil pushers became lionized. The history of hedge funds is a good guide to map the increasing fraud on Wall Street.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hasn't that been the Republican party platform for the last 3 decades? (if it is good for big business, it is good for you)

I'm not sure why you apply that hypocricy to the Democrats. I think the 'change is only good if it benefits me' is a universal theme.

This week it is hedge funds...a few decades ago it was Savings &Loans. the late 1920s and the 1930s had their own issues. ebb and flow...and bubbles will always be unavoidable...but the government needs to be more vigilant about managing the size of the bubbles.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

GM (as well as Ford and Chrysler) have been bankrupt for decades due to irresponsible demands/contracts with unions. There is no real value in any of these companies due to the pension promises.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Very few people go first to a lender to get advise on what they can afford. Most home buyers are looking for and finding the home first, then going to the lender and asking 'how do we make this happen'. In many cases, the only way the lender can get them into that 'home of their dreams' is with some backended mortgage with an ARM and/or balloon payment.

I haven't seen any stats on education level of people that are currently in foreclosure. Do you have a cite for that? I would advise everyone to stay away from believing anything a new home developer says, as they are about on par in honestly level as used car salesmen. I would advise everyone to stay away from taking financial advise from a real estate agent says, as they are not particularly knowledgeable about anything.

Yep...such is the cycle of an economy. It will rise and fall no matter what amount of regulation is in place. The only thing regulation can do is nip off the extent of the peaks and valleys. I do think that government regulation should step in and make it less advantageous to buy a home that the buyer is not intending to live in...and to crack down on all the liars that claim that they will live in the home when they are really buying it for flipping/renting/investment opportunity.

Banks are perfectly willing to lend right now. What they don't want to do is lend to people with no/little downpayment when the current mental state of the populace is that a person should not have to make payments on a home if the home has no equity. I'm not sure why people have that mindset, especially in a world where people routinely buy new cars that lose 25%+ of their value the moment they drive off the lot.

Agreed. Also insane is the ever increasing length of mortgages...10 year...then 15 years...then 20 years///then 30 years...and now 40 year loans are making their way towards becoming the new norm.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

...and at the time, that was correct. In fact, the banks were counting on people refinancing every few years. Every refinancing cycle generates numbers/income for the bank. that refinance also allows the borrower to pay off all the unsecured debt they ammassed on their credit cards. The problem is, eventually the whole industry reaches a point where home values no longer go up every year. That point is reached when people aren't buying anymore...a point where home values peak at the same time (and largely because) unemployment also starts increasing significantly.

I don't really believe that to be the case, but if you do believe it then the solution is to make people take a class and pass a test before being allowed to own a home; just as is required for the license to drive a car.

I don't believe that, either. People are given the time to read. people choose not to take that time of their own accord.

Yep. Consumers were lying to the banks about their income and their debt in order to get loans that they knew they could not afford. They did this because they saw everyone else that was buying 'over their heads' was getting 'free money' through rising home values.
Another regulation that should be put in place for home buying is for people to be required to submit several years of tax returns. The ability to buy should be directly tied to the income that gets reported to the government. If you are a small businessman that lies on your tax return so as to avoid having to pay your fair share of taxes, then one of the penalties will be that you cannot get the home that you can afford, much less the one beyond what you can afford.
It is absolutely ridiculous that people can go in to get a loan and declare themselves to have tice the income (or more) than what they claim on tax returns...and then the government works to bail them out when they cannot afford to make their mortgage payment.

I don't buy that...but then I also don't buy into the idea that people are signing a piece of paper with the interest rate and the words 'ARM Adjustabe Rate Mortgage' and the reset terms/timing written right on the page, but they sign without reading any of it...and you still want to blame the bank and claim that the people are not given the time to read it? Is there no place for personal responsibility?

Insurance costs and tax rates are tied to the value of the thing being insured/taxed. If the value of the thing rises, the costs to insure it and pay taxes on it will also rise. I agree that there are likely people that do not know this...one more reason to force people to take classes and pass tests before being allowed to own land/home.

If by 'lied to' you mean that they lied to themselves. When people tell themselves that their income is going to keep going up every year and they will eventually be more comfortable they need to more honestly look at that claim. If they plan to have kids or retire soon, for example, then they need to realize that their 'income' will be going down, not up. ...and anyone buying a home with the feeling that they can refinance in a couple of years to try and catch up on their debt....well, those people are gambling and they know it.

Unfortunately, yes, people have not actually become any more responsible. The even bigger problem is that IF people became more responsible with their spending, the economy will have even more trouble recovering...so there isn't much incentive for the government, the banks, or the merchants to try and encourage responsibility.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The fact is the majority of the defaulters who were bailed out by BO, defaulted AGAIN in one to two years.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hunter wrote:

How many defaulters were bailed out by Obama? Mostly banks were bailed out, not the people who defaulted.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 29/03/2010 1:37 PM, dr_jeff wrote:

Actually not. There are programs to give money to losers and welshers.
--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's been going on for decades, to the tune of over ten trillion dollars.
It's called welfare.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.