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.
Okay, Nancy . . . explain to us how this isn't gonna cost the taxpayers. When inflation skyrockets, please come back for another press statement and explain that to us - how this bail out did not cost the taxpayers.
Oh, okay, y'all are gonna just print up a bunch of greenbacks . . . and that is not gonna affect taxpayers.
The bottom line is - companies cannot pay the Treasury back in five years if that company is no longer in existence . . . but golly gee, thank you Ms. Pelosi for letting us know this won't cost taxpayers.
Yes, something had to be done . . . but please . . . don't pander to us.
it is infuriating! i am currently watching a democratic senator from illinois (i don't remember his name and don't care) telling us that this is bush's bill and they have fixed it to protect the taxpayer and now they are going to pass it because americans will understand that they are doing what needs to be done. i feel like my eyeballs are going to explode from watching the tv screen and i have to look away.
Still, even with all this, the current plan doesn't address the problem. People can't afford their homes and the credit already extended. Unless the government is just willing to wipe all that away too, these loans are going belly up. People will lose their homes, some cars, credit cards etc. Our economy is based on spending. I don't see how this plan addresses the fundamental problems. I believe it's a band-aid solution. Eventually, it will come off.
This aspect of the solution doesn't address those parts of the probelm, but it does address at last the highest-risk aspect of the problem. The Hope Now Alliance was rolled out last year to reduce the problsm of forward resets creating even more foreclosures and junk, and it has helped decent numbers of people, but not nearly as many or as much as it needs to. The point of allowing bankruptcy judges to redefine mortage contracts was lost in this deal, but it may be back some day. That would help, but either way some vehicle for reorganizing mortgage debt will be needed at some point relatively soon. The problems in 2009 will be less than in 2008, but then they get worse again, and they're bad enough in 2009 to need some action. The majority of those currently or soon to be facing foreclosure could indeed afford to service their mortgages on only slightly different terms. The USG does that sort of reorganization with foreign governments facing debt service problems all the time. I think that sort of model would be appropriate, but the mechanisms would be much more complicated. It will need some work, but you're right that this bit today doesn't go directly to the problems you mention...
it is infuriating! i am currently watching a democratic senator from illinois (i don't remember his name and don't care) telling us that this is bush's bill and they have fixed it to protect the taxpayer and now they are going to pass it because americans will understand that they are doing what needs to be done. i feel like my eyeballs are going to explode from watching the tv screen and i have to look away.
You know, it just occurred to me . . . we are getting to see the partisan antics of this Congress up close.
No wonder this has been a Do Nothing Congress. Too many egos, too much blame assignment . . . no one wants to take a stand b/c they are more interested in getting re-elected than doing the People's Business.
Sickening.
Kick all of them out - both sides of the aisle (w/ very few exceptions!!!!)
it is infuriating! i am currently watching a democratic senator from illinois (i don't remember his name and don't care) telling us that this is bush's bill and they have fixed it to protect the taxpayer and now they are going to pass it because americans will understand that they are doing what needs to be done. i feel like my eyeballs are going to explode from watching the tv screen and i have to look away.
That would probably have been Dick Durbin, since the other one is Barack Obama, but that's straight talk he's giving you. The risks of doing nothing have gotten so high that only a few ideologues are still willing to run them. Paulson and Bernanke drew up the financial and economic blueprint for how (at last) to go after the bad paper that's pushing credit markets toward an effective collapse that could easily lead to a global recession of very serious proportion. What Congress did the past few days was add the political details that make the program workable. Obviosuly there needed to be oversight, and since even Paulson would tell you the $700 billion number was made up, there had to be some means for justifying dollars as you went along. Those sorts of things are not in the bailiwick of either Paulson or Bernanke. Those are appropriate measures for Congress to have come up with. So, we've got a plan that hopefully will get the job done. If it does, it will be a huge thing. If it doesn't, we'll need to have at it some more, but this is something that couldn't be left to itself much longer. We really should have done this in the summer of 2007. Would have been cheaper and easier then, but there wasn't yet the will for it...
Location: Charlotte,NC, US, North America, Earth, Alpha Quadrant,Milky Way Galaxy
3,770 posts, read 7,546,909 times
Reputation: 2118
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
That would probably have been Dick Durbin, since the other one is Barack Obama, but that's straight talk he's giving you. The risks of doing nothing have gotten so high that only a few ideologues are still willing to run them. Paulson and Bernanke drew up the financial and economic blueprint for how (at last) to go after the bad paper that's pushing credit markets toward an effective collapse that could easily lead to a global recession of very serious proportion. What Congress did the past few days was add the political details that make the program workable. Obviosuly there needed to be oversight, and since even Paulson would tell you the $700 billion number was made up, there had to be some means for justifying dollars as you went along. Those sorts of things are not in the bailiwick of either Paulson or Bernanke. Those are appropriate measures for Congress to have come up with. So, we've got a plan that hopefully will get the job done. If it does, it will be a huge thing. If it doesn't, we'll need to have at it some more, but this is something that couldn't be left to itself much longer. We really should have done this in the summer of 2007. Would have been cheaper and easier then, but there wasn't yet the will for it...
Sorry not buying the 'we have to do this' or armagedon will occur. I know you're not the one saying it Sanginsta, but I'm not falling for the fear tactic. I am truly infruiated and sickened as each day goes by. This isn't 'relief' it's a scam on the taxpayer and just another burden placed on the backs of hardworking already burned out Americans- for which I'm one of them. Can we blame the don't-ask-don't-tell mortgage products pushed? Yup. Can we blame the okie-doke committed by those who packaged up all this big bad debt and sold it off and passed it along (remember Goldenwest for Wachovia, and Countrywide for BoA were GREAT deals at the time). We certainly can blame them. We can definitely blame the treasury secretary who's freaking job it is to watch this stuff. I heard a great analogy the other day. It's like running to your neighbor and begging for money because your local power company is at the breaker about to cut your service- oh and you ignored all the disconnect notices and warnings for months. The executive branch is supposedly housed by the party of fiscal conservatives. Coming on national TV and creating fear and panic if I don't turn over nearly $2000 to you (which is what it would cost each American) was pretty shameful. Oh yeah, just trust us, that we'll fix it and we won't be back to ask for any more money.
We are a society built on the free market (supposedly) and if you search my posts, I'm pretty much a capitalist pro guy. The market will need to work it out and we'll deal with the ripple effects. The dollar is already worthless overseas (ever try to exchange $500 for euros, HA!).
I would feel a little better about this if there was ANY real attempt to help those who are squeezed by increasing ARMS. How about reseting their rates back to the initial fixed rate and keeping it there for 10-15 years? Allowing people to keep their homes is good for the country.
We bail out the farmers (we gotta eat so I can't argue with that to much), the airlines, the banks, and every company that's got a lobbying firm on capitol hill. It's gotta stop somewhere folks, and we have deal with the outcome and painfully learn from it and move on.
On a side note, we can put a proposal to come up with.
On a side not, what really boils me is we can mysteriously find nearly a trillion dollars in a weekend but can't find a few 100 million to provide state of the art facilities for wounded troops, provide real health care and housing for the family of deceased service men and women. The madness has to stop!
Upside down mortgages are a result of the credit problem, in that so few potential home buyers can qualify for the credit necessary to buy one. This essentially creates a false shortage of buyers and the decreased demand causes prices to fall. If Treasury can pull enough junk off the credit system's books and a resulting return of confidence in value means money begins to move again, the supply of money to lend will increase, the number of home buyers who can qualify for credit will increase, and the price of houses will increase. That's part of the Main Street benefit people speak of.
Wouldn't it be a problem of over inflated prices? Because people could get higher mortgages, the price of the homes went up more and more and more? I don't see how extending more credit to these over priced houses is going to help. Regardless of what the bankers say, a person making $60k/yr cannot afford the price of a house in most major markets without these ARMs at current prices. There's also the problem of taxes placed on what they claim is the value of these homes. The legislation doesn't address any of this from what I have read. It only address the liquidity issue. People are still going to lose their homes eventually even if they can refinance for a short period. Don't housing prices need to fall before the markets can really function again?
Wouldn't it be a problem of over inflated prices? Because people could get higher mortgages, the price of the homes went up more and more and more? I don't see how extending more credit to these over priced houses is going to help. Regardless of what the bankers say, a person making $60k/yr cannot afford the price of a house in most major markets without these ARMs at current prices. There's also the problem of taxes placed on what they claim is the value of these homes. The legislation doesn't address any of this from what I have read. It only address the liquidity issue. People are still going to lose their homes eventually even if they can refinance for a short period. Don't housing prices need to fall before the markets can really function again?
Exactly.
The government is absolutely powerless to stop home prices from falling to their natural levels, at least in terms of real dollars. Nominally, prices can remain relatively consistent, or at least not fall as much, but if it takes $5,000 to fill your fridge, what's the point of the 200K condo to remain at 200K?
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.
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.
