Sad day for America

Page 12 of 16  
On 29/03/2010 5:47 PM, Conscience wrote:


Agreed. Hard to sell raising taxes by 30% overspend year after year to bailout losers with bad credit ratings and don't pay their bills.
Hopefully after this is said and don't some stiff laws and hard nosed for abuse types can re-take control from the debt mongers. Pity we all have to pay for debt, welfare and perpetual abuse.
--
--------------
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:

How many defaulters were helped out by the programs?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 29/03/10 10:29 AM, Obveeus wrote:

I was talking to a woman the other day who was telling me that she was in the process of refinancing her house to get some money out to buy a car, and she mentioned that she refinances often, the most recent time before this one being las October (five months ago). She was claiming that it didn't cost her anything because the lender said that it was a "no cost" refinance. Clearly she did not understand that closing costs were added onto the loan balance and that every time she refinanced her loan balance was going up by around $3000 (unless she had negative points to offset it, in which case the interest rate would be higher).

Well the government is not bailing out the borrower as much as they're bailing out the lender by trying to keep the borrower from defaulting.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SMS wrote:

She probably doesn't understand that once you own your home, you can lose it in a foreclosure, either. Once it's paid off, the only way you can lose it is if you don't pay your taxes.

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

Unfortunately, there are tons of people just like her that are suplementing their 'income' by living off of their home equity. Lots of those people got a rude awakening over the last couple of years when they found out that they couldn't refinance again and that they actually had to live on their incomes.

True. However, if the government is going to decide that this form of corporate welfare is going to continue (bailing out companies that are 'too big to fail), then the government should take some regulatory steps to help reduce the chances of this kind of welfare being needed in the future. Step #1: every person that is given a home loan should be forced to submit several years of tax returns and the amount of loan that they can qualify for should be based upon that income. one affect will be a reduction in the number of people cheating on their taxes to hide income. Another affect will be to stop people from overextending themselves beyond their means with their mortgage commitment. And yes, I realize that it will mean that people with less than a couple years of income history (just out of school, just in the country, etc...) won't be able to get loans...but that is a good thing as well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 29/03/2010 2:38 PM, SMS wrote:

If Obama wanted to solve it, he would pass a debtor law, default and you become a slave until it is paid.
Then after a few examples, they will start paying.
Many are now playing the poor game to get handouts.
--
--------------
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

And they play it with multiple identities.
Easy to do when documentation isn't required.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Want more government regulations? You have not seen anything yet, wait till the government totally takes over our health care in 2014.
It has already begun! The Government that CURRENTLY regulates trans-fats is trying to tax the "sugary" drinks that are killing our children.
Next will come smoking regulations. One local major employer announced today they will test all new workers for nicotine, if you have it in your system they will not give you a job because it will further increase their health care costs under the new bill.
Three major US manufactures are telling us their health care cost will go up by millions of dollars a year, which will lead to higher prices for their products. What next will they not employ any new employees who are overweight? The federal government will start controlling what we eat for the same reasons. Can government control of the use of alcohol be far behind?
Not only will the government be telling you what you can eat, wait to you see what happens to your privilege to DRIVE when they start to restrict driving, or what you can drive to reduce the number injured on killed on our highways.
I suspect we will see a new "1984" book written called "2084," total government control of the lives of all those still alive at the time. LOL

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

They regulate drugs, requiring that the meet certain purity and effectiveness standards. They regulate doctors, teachers and other professionals, requiring that they don't have a serious criminal history before they can go into the clinic or classroom. What a horror? What's next? Requiring that priests don't molest children? And what right does the federal government have to make sure that cars are safe? The nerve of the government.

That's a local employer taking its health-care costs in its own hands. Should we regulate that, too?

Well, if a business stops hiring fat people, isn't that the business's decision? Are you saying we should regulate businesses?
What if it is one of those three major US manufacturers? That would help lower their health-care costs.
That alcohol regulation would be good for you and stop your drunken rants.

Legally, I may not drive a tractor-trailer, school bus or motorcycle. You think this is a bad thing?

Yeah, right.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In other words you think it is a good idea for the GOVERNMENT to control what or where YOU choose to eat, or what YOU choose to buy? How about where you live or what you say, is that a good idea as well? Try doing a search of the governments powers in Germany in 1939, dummy
You are even more of a lefty loon then I suspected. IF you were still alive in 2084 you likely would be first in line to buy the book. Do you realize some of the outrageous things predict in 1984 already have, or soon will, come to pass....dr_jeff?
wrote in message >

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

Regulate and control are too different things. I don't think it is a good idea that quacks with names like chiropractors, homeopaths and naturopaths can sell their snake oil - unproven and sometimes dangerous treatments. The free-market economy didn't work so well with the mortgages, did it?

You mean the Germany which the US was fighting when my father and three uncles entered the war? The one the claimed my uncle's life?
Not all regulation is bad.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In which branch of the military did you serve, dr_jeff?
wrote in message >

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

You're talking about the proverbial "slippery slope". The problem occurs when there is no discerning between what is minimally necessary in the sense of "That goevernment is best which governs least" (first written by Thoreau in his essay "Resistance to Civil Government").
Consider the contradiction between the ideas of "keeping the government out of my bedroom" (talking about gay rights and other sexual subjects) or "Keep the government's hands off my uterus" (the feminist/pro-abortion crowd) and being for single-payor (government) healthcare, in which the gubmint essentially in many respects owns your body and knows everything about you (to use as they will).
--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dr_jeff wrote:

Let's look at the other side of the coin: Where do you draw the line of the government involvement in and micromanagement of our personal lives? It sounds to me like once we violate any of the Constitution in that regard, your philosophy is that that barrier is now broken, there therefore now are no constraints, we throw the Constitution out.
The problem is that when government has the extra-Constitutional authority that it has taken on, it allows manipulation of information to achieve political goals (hidden agendas). The present day is full of examples in things such as "extinction of polar bears" and "global warming". Once a problem is identified and linked to a cause using false science, then anything that can in any way be associated with that cause is subject to restriction and taxation, never mind that the original premises that the controlled activity is linked is based on false/manipulated science invented purely to accomplish hidden goals.
Health care is a problem? OK - private property is no longer a valid concept - we'll confiscate what we need from those who have it (redistribution of wealth), Marxism rules, the Constitution drools.
The Constitution prohibits certain things precisely because those things are subject to manipulation by despots (see Declaration of Independence). Prohibiting things that otherwise may seem like the "right thing to do" are protecting against a much worse "evil" (can I say that word?).
Basically what I'm saying is that we are way down on that slippery slope and have no Constitution left by all the "logic" that is being applied in our political system.
Pick up and read a copy of Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny".
--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill Putney wrote:

Incorrect. My philosophy is that the proper place of government (that is the people) is to set up regulations so that people are protected from unfair and unsafe practices (e.g., lending laws and health laws).

You seem to make the assumption that there are hidden agendas and that global warming is not real. Fact is that the evidence overwhelmingly shows that our unintentional manipulation of the CO2 concentration can have drastic changes in the environment and that last changes have already occurrred.

That's human nature. Look how we let Bush run over us with anything linked to 9/11 and security.
However, as pointed out, it is not false science. It is false science to assume that we can dump CO2 into atmosphere and destroy our environment without consequences.

We already have a redistribution of wealth - from the poor to the rich. If you don't believe me, look at how the poor and middle class have barely got richer while the rich have become much richer over the last 20 or years. In addition, health care is a big reason why wages haven't gone up all that much. Companies pay so much for health care, they can't afford higher raises. Yet, no one has explained why health care should be paid for by employers.

Right, I am going to waste my time reading anything because you recommend it.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dr_jeff wrote:

Yeah - let's talk in 5 to 10 years if Obama's plans are implemented and see how that's working for everyone. Talk about unfair and unsafe - you ain't seen nothing yet.

As does anyone with a brain in their head. Where have you been the last year? (It was obvious way before that, but the sold out people cannot not even deny it any longer.)

That the whole thing has been a hoax by the people at the top with a lot of people at various levels of involvement having been suckered in.

Again - you apparently haven't been conscious of anything factual related to the subject for quite some time.

We can't do much about whatever happened then. We are in the here and now. I don't buy the logic that someone in the past broke rules, therefore the rules no longer apply, i.e., we violated the Constitution in the past, so therefore the Constitution is no longer the law of the land.

And only you and Al Gore still say that.

Let's see - CO2 - that thing that plants thrive on and in turn give off oxygen that we breath - that gas that has been falsely labeled as a pollutant by the people perpetrating fraud on us. The science doesn't suport what you're saying when the plotted data is put back the way it started before the Al Gore's of the world time shifted the two linked parameters. But of course you'll pretend to not know about that or deny that that ever happened.

And so therefore we should continue to abandon the Constitution - is what you're saying.
In addition, health care is a big reason why wages haven't

So you want to do away with the Constitution - yes - I understand that that is your position. You don't have to say it explicitly - it is obvious.

You have to be kidding. You think that by my suggesting something that it is therefore thought to be imperative that you do it? You can't be that stupid. But you're right - it wouldn't be a waste of time to read the thing that I recommended. But just so it is clear - you are under no compulsion to do so just because I recommend it. You seemed to be confused about that.
--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
response to some dipshit:

On that same note, two Senators are demanding that NASA speak up:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/03/31/nasas-flawed-climate-data/?test=latestnews
But
in all fairness, scientist have been "vindicated" in their data manipulations and lies.
After a whole one day of testimony:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/03/31/climate-gate-inquiry-largely-clears-scientists/?test=latestnews
I'm
sure it was covered thoroughly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

there is NO global warming. It has been blasted to bits, all the supposed research was rigged. There is no evadence to show any global warmning at all. Quit drinking the dam coolade. Its all about the money no scientific proof at all. KB (ps there has been global cooling the last 20 years thought, how the heck does that fit into your plan eh)
--
THUNDERSNAKE #9

Protect your rights or "Lose" them
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kevin wrote:

Bull.
> It has been blasted to bits, all the

Only in the minds of deniers.

You mean like the ice that is melting at the poles, the warmer climates around the globe, melting ice on tops of mountains, and the earlier springs and later falls?

You're entitle to put your head in the sand if you want to. You're a blind as those who deny that evolution exists. In fact, evolution is the central idea of biology.
jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


how much coolade can you drink??????

That stuff is happening all the time, it changes around the globe normally. Most all that stuff you mention is countered by a heaver than normal event elsewhere, we just had the snowest and most days with snow on the ground ever here since they have been keeping records. (also the 3rd coldest) It doesn`t mean diddly.

your full of crap there too but I am not going to argue that point. KB

--
THUNDERSNAKE #9

Protect your rights or "Lose" them
  Click to see the full signature.
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.