Hugh_Hoy Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 What is needed, IMO, is an entire budget overhaul and getting the troops back to the USA where we need them! Yes, the $$$ spent in Iraq and Afgan MUST be spent in the USA to help US citizens (not illegals). Use the troops to secure borders. Kick out the illegals. Stop ALL benefits to illegals. If an illegal gives birth to a child, NO automatic citizenship, etc... HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 A tax credit of $15,000 which can be spread over 3 years is the same thing...as is a subsidized/negotiated interest rate. Ends up with others paying the $15,000 and the difference in interest. These are just political bones tosses to the home building industry lobbyists. It's apparent that that all it will do is result in the same or more people lining up to buy houses they can't afford. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 I don't recall seeing anything in this plan that pays down the principal on any loan. If Iâ??m not correct in this, I hope someone can point out a source Otherwise, in these times, I donâ??t have a real problem with government stepping to help people restructure the loans into something they can make the payments on. What is the alternative? Throw them out and foreclose? Then who wins? I think nobody, the person is out of their house and the bank is left with something it probably canâ??t sell and is certainly not making them any money. I donâ??t like it and it is certainly going to help some people that either made serious mistakes or committed fraud, but what else is there to do? TH Most of what is being said, if not all what is being said about bailing homeowners, is empty air. It sounds good, is controversial but not much if anything is really happening. There was talk of lien stripping the 2nd mortgage, that doesn't appear to be really happening. There is talk of renegotiating the interest rate of the loan but that is not happening either. There is talk of all of this wonderful help but so far, there appears to be nobody that has been helped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weird Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Can I say something about the "I don't want to pay to bailout..." argument. WTF? Do any of us know what exactly happens to the money we pay out in taxes? Is somebody from the government going to knock on my door next week demanding extra money from me to support the "irresponsible" homeowners? Because it seems to me that none of our taxes are going to change as a result of this so it's just a matter of where the gov't is choosing to spend the money. So, as a practical matter, this policy doesn't affect us at all. Certainly it could be argued that sometime in the future taxes will be raised because of the expenditures...but to act as if right now this stimulus will be a hardship on anybody is ridiculous. It's not costing anybody a cent more than what they are already paying. And, as to the long term cost...you must balance that against having millions more thrown into the streets, thus unable to buy things, thus causing more unemployment from companies who can't sekll enough stuff, leading to more homelessness, leading to...(and the snowball gwors and grows) Seeing as how my money is now being used in an unnecessary war we were lied into causing death and misery worldwide...I would be MUCH happier having my money used to bailout people back home and keep our economy moving. As a practical matter if all your taxes went to me you wouldn't be paying anything more then you were now either. Good logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Dave has lost it. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 In reality its one more 'unfair' thing in a long line of 'unfair' things. * Certain corporations getting tax abatements, low or no interest loans, grants, subsidies, etc. While other companies can't. Or if you don't have the right lobbyist. * Citizens on the dole in any number of ways from food stamps, subsidized housing, tax credits, etc. While other people who may qualify or even those who don't struggle to make ends meet. * Tax loopholes designed for people who make a high income that lower income folks do not have access to. * Social Security. Those paying into it now to probably won't see the same benefits or perhaps won't even have SS around when they become of age. * Some folks paid the high price of hurricane, earthquake or other natural disaster insurance at great personal expense and the government via FEMA and/or other agencies provide assistance monetarily and otherwise. * A few states tightened their belts and gave up a lot of services, balanced their budgets, lived within their means and now see states like California and others now on the verge of getting governement money for huge budget deficits they brought on themselves from lack of planning or outright incompetence. States deemed too important to the nations economy (Ca, Mich, etc) * Entrance to college, med, law schools based on criteria other than academic record. and on and on. There is always something "unfair" to some of us who follow the rules. How is this any different? There is going to be something at some point we will all need a help up or hand out for. Things you can't plan for. The problem is where is that line? As much as it pisses me off that pregnant women sneak across the border to have their kids in an American hospital so their kids are automatic Americans and they get to stay by default as parent, its still a part of this country that is sacrosanct. I would not like to see that changed. The southern border will not be defended till a Dem president does it. Possibly a latino President. A lot of times in American history you need a person that is generally part of the people that oppose it to get someting done. The civil rights act was pushed by a white southerner (LBJ). Certain liberal programs (Environment Protection Act, Endangered Species Act) and ideas (recognizing China), were proposed, supported and signed by a far right conservative (Nixon). Same with some things tthat were deemed conservative like curtailing social welfare was done by a Democrat (Clinton). The one thing that those that did pay their mortgages have over the ones being bailed out is good credit. Its not much of a consolation but it is something they will always have over the ones that were bailed out. They will be the most sought after and first in line for banks and financial institutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaiHome Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I donâ??t doubt that little is actually happening right now. Probably because they cannot figure out how to really help without paying down the principal and that will never fly. The important thing right now is to stop the flood of foreclosures and try to get some capital flowing into the market, and that is based on perception. At best they are going to have the banks restructure the loans so the payments are within normal mortgage payment guidelines of income and the government will make up the interest to the banks. The principal will have to paid by the mortgagor even if it takes the rest of their lives. Maybe they can eventually sell it to get out from under it if the prices start back up a bit. I think this should be done through the bankruptcy courts, as these people should have to pay some price for the foolish/fraudulent decisions. With a bankruptcy against them, it will not be so easy (though not impossible) to get future credit. TH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 If you were the one who loaned them money, I doubt if you would be so quick to recommend that the courts give them a pass and lose your money. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaiHome Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Are you actually reading my post or the proposed bailout? Where did I say the holders for the mortgages would lose money? In fact I said exactly the opposite. The mortgagor must pay back the principle and the bailout money will help the mortgage holders to maintain the income (that's called interest) from the mortgages. From your posts here and elsewhere it appears you are bound and determined to make this a partisan issue, and anything the current administration propose you are going oppose, even if it means ignoring the facts. TH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.