U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2009, 05:31 PM
 
3,722 posts, read 4,718,320 times
Reputation: 4751

Advertisements

What don't we just drop the illusion and become a fully socialist government. It seems to be what the majority wants.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2009, 05:35 PM
 
Location: southern california
57,922 posts, read 76,905,744 times
Reputation: 51291
cant have that. then they would hold real estate agents accountable. also CEO's of big fat banks would not get bailout money. out of the question. FYI i got a note of response from senator barbara boxer about the fact that 1/2 the bailout so far went to purchase chinese securities.
she is not pleased either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2009, 08:06 PM
 
3,283 posts, read 4,758,060 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by trishguard View Post
What don't we just drop the illusion and become a fully socialist government. It seems to be what the majority wants.
we've been there in some form for about 80 years already. the problem with socialism is that it is unsustainable. at some point the idea that you can spend more than you earn runs into reality. trishguard, it is the socialist policies which have slowly crept into our system which are 100% to blame for the current situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 04:35 AM
 
Location: western East Roman Empire
7,456 posts, read 11,242,810 times
Reputation: 7024
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
This is an idea that I thought of- instead of tossing all the billions at trying to boost home values on the mortgage side, why not instead insure home values at the purchase price for homeowners? If the government were to insure homes at the price you buy them at- much like the FDIC does with banks- and you know your home can never lose value, this would do more to boost confidence in the markets than anything else. What do you think?
production - consumption = saving + investment

You can work to put up a foundation, floors, walls and a roof, fine.

You still have to work to grow food, generate energy, transport, and so on.

You can invent a symbol for the value of your work, call it money, you can assign a number to the value of your foundation, floor, walls, and roof.

Guess what?

You still have to work to maintain your house, grow food, generate energy, for transport, etc.

production - consumption = saving + investment

Fiddling with the money supply and assigning number values to dwellings to make people feel wealthy doesn't change the basic equation.

Guess what? You still have to work.

Americans fell victim to money illusion, one of the oldest tricks in the book, because of their greed and laziness, thinking they could achieve real wealth because of a dollar number attached to the supposed value of a foundation floor, walls and roof (in many cases even made of shoddy material).

In return, they got what they deserved: the little real wealth that they do have has been stolen by those who perpetrated the money illusion scheme.

Reread the parable of the talents and apply.

Don't read and reread the parable of the talents, and let the money-illusion artists apply, rinse, and repeat as needed, every generation or so.

Good luck!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,771 posts, read 17,231,587 times
Reputation: 9352
58robbo wrote:
we've been there ( socialism ) in some form for about 80 years already.
Yeah...CORPORATE socialism/welfare, where the government gives billions to the uber wealthy, a few crumbs to the poor, and nothing to the middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 12:11 PM
 
105 posts, read 201,249 times
Reputation: 33
Should The Government Insure Home Values?


Quote:
Originally Posted by younglisa7 View Post
Why should the gov't insure something that someone bought when it was overpriced? Should they also insure the Mac mansions that 2 people are living in? Homes should lose value if your neighborhood goes to crap, if there are no jobs there, etc. Real estate is not a guaranteed investment.
+1

Quote:
Originally Posted by tallrick View Post
Price controls are insane. There should be no support for residential real estate, something which is a consumable and produces nothing. Government guarantees are why we have an economic mess. Get the government out of the market and let prices fall. Real estate can never be too low.
+1

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunsprit View Post
Very BAD idea.

Not worth even putting down all the reasons why ... except to say that it's not the gov't's responsibility to protect/guarantee individual purchases.
+1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 12:17 PM
 
19,108 posts, read 20,677,468 times
Reputation: 8394
Let me get this right? I pay off an appraiser who appraises my home to be worth 500k even though its only worth 200k.... then I sell my home to my sister for 200k and I get 300k from the government? And then my sisters sells me back my house for 150k and she collects 350k? And then we keep doing it again and again and again and become millionaires? Wow, what a great idea....not... apparently you are not in the insurance industry...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Seattle, WA
209 posts, read 549,120 times
Reputation: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by 58robbo View Post
i can't give you a reason as to why it would be worse tham bailing out the banks because i was vehemently opposed to that too. all bailouts create an environment where we're overly reliant on government for our livelyhoods. imo, loss of economic liberty and loss of liberty as a whole are the same thing
How about no bailout for anyone. You would be using my tax dollars to pay for this and I believe that propping up housing prices is not the mission statement of America. How about making sure everyone has the ability to get a university education so our future generations will create the jobs of tomorrow. Keeping prices up so people can consume is a bridge to no where. Jobs and income are what you really want, not expensive housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 01:18 PM
 
2,153 posts, read 5,087,501 times
Reputation: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
Let me get this right? I pay off an appraiser who appraises my home to be worth 500k even though its only worth 200k.... then I sell my home to my sister for 200k and I get 300k from the government? And then my sisters sells me back my house for 150k and she collects 350k? And then we keep doing it again and again and again and become millionaires? Wow, what a great idea....not... apparently you are not in the insurance industry...
No you wouldn't get the money. The govt. would pay the difference on your mortgage to the bank.

You would walk away with zilch, but you wouldn't be upside down. The bank gets the money owed, the price of the house has now been corrected with zero pain for everyone.

Your sister would now have a 200k mortage on the house. Your original mortgage of 500,000 or whatever it was would be paid off. You wouldn't get any cash on the deal. It just pays off the upside down part of the mortgage.

That's what I got from the original post. I would think this would be much more helpful than the current bailout going on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2009, 01:33 PM
 
48,509 posts, read 86,196,823 times
Reputation: 18105
Do you really believe that the government can afford to actaully pay off those loans. Just to do what it has its has to borrow money and that is a drop in the bucket compared to home values. The government is basically broke and in heavy debt itself.If you had watched the congressional hearings on Fannie Mae and Mac you would ahve seen that the governamnt can;t afforsd it on like 18% of GDP and that all spoken for and then some.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:30 PM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top