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.
I don't know how you define "peasants", but the bottom 50% of Americans pay 3.97% of the taxes, while the top 50% pay 96.03%. Yet the bottom 50% get their children educated at the same schools, drive on the same roads and enjoy the same national resources while contributing little to these "shared" obligations. This is the group that Obama has targeted for help, while putting all this help on the top 50%'s tab. You're right, America is not a fair place.
Totally agree with your point here.
President Obama said it himself today at his new conference (maybe giving a hint before his State of the Union address tomorrow night).
Starting in 2011, President Obama going to the wealthier American pay even more of their "fair share" and become even more Patriotic as Joe Biden wants us to.
So lets see here, I could lose 100K on my home if I decided to sell it. The government said I make too much money and I am responsible for myself so I will just have to eat the costs myself. While at the same time, the government is willing to use my tax money to bail out other homeowners.
Come 2011, the President wants to raise my taxes even more in order to pay down the national debt (for which I literally get no benefit).
At the same time, the government does not want to eliminate the AMT because its become too much of a cash cow for them (although it was never intended to raise tax revenue).
The other problem is that many home owners who are in foreclosure want to foreclose...it might sound weird but many already figured out that they can scam their way out and buy a bigger house for less money and put in another name...so far I haven't seen any tears or bad scenes in my community...people keep smiling, still have their job and move out while having lived for FREE for over a year....IMO too bad for the few who can't help it but as far as I have seen it...NO bailouts would be the best...you sign the papers and you are responsible!
Come 2011, the President wants to raise my taxes even more in order to pay down the national debt (for which I literally get no benefit).
That's the coup de grace. I think most people that pay a lot of taxes think that they're paying more than their fair share, but they roll with it for "the greater good." Obama has an agenda of wealth redistribution, and he's determined to cram it down, but at what price? Getting the country in unprecedented debt by passing a bill that helps so few (and primarily those that pay the least in taxes), then sticking those whom he has completely ignored with the bill is causing escalating resentment and outrage.
For someone who ran on a platform of unity, Obama is the most divisive president I can remember. His policies are turning Americans against Americans, and a country divided is a country weakened. I don't see how anybody can find any sort of patriotism in that.
That's the coup de grace. I think most people that pay a lot of taxes think that they're paying more than their fair share, but they roll with it for "the greater good." Obama has an agenda of wealth redistribution, and he's determined to cram it down, but at what price?
That's the problem I am having with this financial/housing crisis.
This patchwork idea of helping some while letting others fend for themselves does not work. And it creates a lot of ill will.
It's pretty much a given that the economic stimulus bill that just pass will do very little to stimulate the economy and we will need economic stimulus bill (Version 2 in about another 10-12 months).
The free market will take care of itself. If housing declines another 10-20 percent, so be it. The market will dictate whether we have hit bottom. There should be no government intervention.
Fair play? Investors are down 80% in "conservative" funds that had undisclosed CDOs. Nobody's paying individual investors or pension funds back and this is derailing a lot of middle-class retirements. So I'm not sure how taxpayers are filling in the investor's pockets? It's the homeowners who're getting the bailouts and the top executives who're getting the bonuses. The banks are either going under or getting nationalized, both of which completely wipe out investors. Municipalities and unions are getting creamed, because their pension plans have been decimated, and people can't do anything about it. They aren't getting any of their losses back... and many won't ever be able to retire now.
I don't know how you define "peasants", but the bottom 50% of Americans pay 3.97% of the taxes, while the top 50% pay 96.03%. Yet the bottom 50% get their children educated at the same schools, drive on the same roads and enjoy the same national resources while contributing little to these "shared" obligations. This is the group that Obama has targeted for help, while putting all this help on the top 50%'s tab. You're right, America is not a fair place.
Sorry, somewhere up there I mentioned that the investment bankers "duped" the investors by packaging junk into AAA primo stuff. But likewise, we can also put some blame on the investors for not researching the instruments that they were buying. If the returns were significantly higher than other AAA rated investments... then they should of done some due diligence, verify and check on how things work.
Anyhow, there are for sure some investors getting a pay back... but I don't really think it's the typical retirement accounts or middle/upper middle class investment funds. Somebody's accounts are being padded when banks take in billions of dollars to shore up balance sheets. Not much of it has come out in the form of added liquidity.... it's been pretty much a black box for TARP funds.
Meanwhile, as more and more people default... we're all being dragged down while the investment banks are allowed to convert themselves into banks with federal aide and protection.
"The problem is that President Obama and his staff have not yet defined what a responsible homeowner is." <br><br>
That's easy. They are defined as losers that have "obama" stickers on their cars and promise to re-elect the fool. They will be in the "favored" bucket.
investors, and the public were looking for ways to boost their returns in the early 2,000's.. stocks were down and scarey and money markets and banks were paying under 1%... people wanted higher interest and wall street found ways to give it to them
they took the same ole mortgage packages they always sold off and created different levels of packages that worked like this:
they went to a conservative group of people and offered them the normal package at 2%... they then took the same exact package and offered it to a little more aggressive group... they said we will give you 4% ..only hitch is you get paid after the first group.... they then went to a very aggressive group of investors and said we will pay you 7% ,only hitch , you get paid after the first 2 groups.....
all worked well until it looked like defaults were picking up and the top groups may not get paid.... they sold and stopped buying mortgage packages, then the lower groups panicked and did the same... eventually the mortgage market ground to a halt ...
since these were all the same mortgage packages that were always being sold the credt agencies saw no need to rate them differently...it was the marketing of them that was different.....
thats where we are today... loads of these packages floating around that no one wants to buy and so banks cant value them.
investors, and the public were looking for ways to boost their returns in the early 2,000's.. stocks were down and scarey and money markets and banks were paying under 1%... people wanted higher interest and wall street found ways to give it to them
they took the same ole mortgage packages they always sold off and created different levels of packages that worked like this:
they went to a conservative group of people and offered them the normal package at 2%... they then took the same exact package and offered it to a little more aggressive group... they said we will give you 4% ..only hitch is you get paid after the first group.... they then went to a very aggressive group of investors and said we will pay you 7% ,only hitch , you get paid after the first 2 groups.....
all worked well until it looked like defaults were picking up and the top groups may not get paid.... they sold and stopped buying mortgage packages, then the lower groups panicked and did the same... eventually the mortgage market ground to a halt ...
since these were all the same mortgage packages that were always being sold the credt agencies saw no need to rate them differently...it was the marketing of them that was different.....
thats where we are today... loads of these packages floating around that no one wants to buy and so banks cant value them.
In theory this system would of continued to work IF the whole pot wasn't tainted. Lender's became too lax, and basically the whole pool was all junk when 70%+ of all loans were sub prime, no doc, etcetera loans. But, to top it off, CDOs were "insured" through CDS (credit default swaps)... so, that is why even a pile of poop became AAA rated.
CDOs issued now, with standard lending requirements still should have a viable market... but investors are scared.
-chuck22b
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.
