Posted on 04/23/2008 8:28:58 AM PDT by bstein80
Why should American taxpayers have to pay to bailout reckless lenders and borrowers?
The website Angryrenter.com, launched just last week, has a vitiation demanding that Congress not pass any bailout programs that reward risky borrowing and lending. To wit: "Let the free market sort it out!"
The petition is gathering 40 to 50 signatures per hour, according to spokesman Adam Brandon, who adds that the site is already getting 15,000 visitors a day.
"There's a huge segment of the country saying, 'We don't want our money used for a bailout,'" said Brandon.
AngryRenter.com is backed by FreedomWorks, the conservative, free-market Washington-based lobbying group run by former House majority leader Dick Armey.
"A third of the American public rents," Brandon pointed out. "They're saying 'I've been saving for a mortgage for years. I could have jumped in on a subprime loan too. Now I'm going to have to pay for a government bailout."
Many CNNMoney.com readers agree, expressing outrage at the idea of seeing their taxes used to keep people in homes they never should have purchased.
"We are both working professionals who would have liked to buy," said Matthew Haas, a community development organizer who moved to Los Angeles with his wife in 2003. They opted not to pay bubble prices, and are still renting despite ample income.
"Now we have hit [the alternative minimum tax] and are finding out our tax dollars are going to bail out others." "Where is value, morally, as a country?" he said. "Is it taking taxpayer money and applying it to people who should never have bought, people who were flippers?"
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
I agree with CNN for once.
Because the health of their own 401K's depends on it. Let the lenders take the heat they deserve and the whole economic shell game collapses.
Signed. Things are reaching a fever pitch out there.
Take a hit. Withdraw the funds, hoard them until after the collapse, and sift through the rubble for something worthwhile.
Not to mention those who were simply trying to flip houses for a profit as the market rose.
Why should I pay because they lost a bet on what the market would do?
...
Look folks....If Chase gets into trouble on this, have you figured out what family own Chase and what position they hold in the government?
American taxpayers are flipping off the flippers.
As it eventually must. Better to take the punishment now, than postpone it and make it worse for later.
The political morons who now want to bail everyone out are the same morons who eased regulations and encouraged/required lenders to lend to substandard borrowers and urban minority borrowers. “It’s fer the poor,” they said.
Hmmm. I’m just guessing here - are they Democrats? With one president in the family, and a swimmer?
Bull.
L
Why should American taxpayers have to pay to bailout reckless lenders and borrowers?
::::::
They/we should not. Just because some poorly-managed banks are willing to give money to people who cannot pay it back, should not be our problem. If responsiblity in lending, and corporate business in general, is no longer a requirement for success or failure, then our whole capitalist system will collapse.
Accountability in government and business is a must.
"We are from the govt and we are here to help"
Signed too. Almost 6,00 signatures, and growing fast.Surprised CNN did the story.
And THAT, FRiend, is the entire plan.
You may be right, but the bailout was made on behalf of state and local governments.
Property taxes are going to decline at least 10% due to the current decline in appraisal values. The next several years are going to be interesting to watch in that regard.
it’s just mindless politicians, and their idiot staff who once again, by watching MSM 24 hours per day to supposedly guage the political climate, are trying to show they are “doing something” no matter how ridiculous.
“The upcoming rebate checks....”
And did I or did I not hear that Sec. Paulsen declared that the tax rebates would create 400K-500K jobs?
I thought that was just about the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard.
It’s about time, let the fools go broke and take the tax payers dollars back from the worthless banks.
When the executive branch is sending 1.5 billion more to Mexico to help them secure their southern border, when it's securing 500 million to help palestinians buy their homes, then why should I continue to complain when our best and brightest in DC think we have money to burn?
I thought McCain had some testicles but he flip-floped on this issue in about a minute.
LOL, much of the over appraised property needs to drop 40 to 60%.
Or just move them into the lowest risk fund you can find.
Congress creates the problem, then they campaign against the same problem.
SIGNED.
The rebates will only create more money to buy goods from China.
Bingo. Now if McCain would just match his rhetoric with a plan that actually doesn’t reward those who made bad decisions.
No, why don't you tell us. I get the feeling what you state will not be anything like the annual statement that list's Chase's top shareholders, every one of which is a mutual fund or pension fund.
Now if you what to infer what family controls what fund that owns some Chase stock that is a different story, but it is in no way a garuantee that they even have a member on the board.
Post facts, and we will listen, post BS and you will be rightfully ignored.
The Community Reinvestment Act which Clinton expanded, not hearing much about this act from the media. No surprise there. Hillary needs to be reminded of this act every time she tries to blame president Bush for the current housing problem.
This is any different than any other time in history, how?
Are we starting to see the pattern here, or just stating the obvious?
P.S. I agree with you, I'm just playing the Devil's advocate.
Just so I get this right, because I'm a simple guy.
Years ago the government made praises to those giving sub-prime loans and even threatened lending institutions because of what they described as unfair lending practices, “Redlining.”
Threats and intimidation as well as rewards for those playing ball (Shore Bank was said to be “the most important bank in America.” by former President Bill Clinton) because after all they were giving loans to people who technically didn't qualify because of their credit score and net worth.
Now, years later as this bubble bursts, the government in it's infinite wisdom talks of “predatory lenders,” and points the fingers at the lenders, offering a de facto bail out to remedy a situation to those who should have never had the money in the first place. Where does the money for the bail outs come from? Who essentially will pay for this? It's monopoly money, right? Does this not make sense to others as well? Am I seeing this all wrong?
Kind of like how people in Congress complain about “obscene profits” by the oil companies when the federal government was pocketing more off of each gallon of gas than the sellers were.
I’d rather neither side be helped. Let the free market sort it out completely.
Great little video from AngryRenters that puts the issue into a nutshell.
Pass it on...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOaDrM3rMXs
Sign me up.
Why should responsible taxpayers pay for idiots?
Where, oh where have the supply-siders gone? They sure as hell aren’t in the Cabinet.
6,719
Being the dummy I am, I wonder, how does the “Community Reinvestment Act” play into the sub-prime mess? LOL
Da gumbermint is here to help. And what’s scary is that today many who call themselves conservatives agree. But what the hell, why not, bail them out, but only after Bush signs a law mandating CO2 reduction and banns incandescent light bulbs in a few years! Boy, that ethanol thing worked out really well too! Reagan once said, something about some words in the English language all people should fear; the Republican Party and those claiming to be conservative have forgotten those words and replaced it with “compassionate conservativism” which like their European conservative counterparts hold to family and Judea-Christian values, is tough on crime and national defense, but more or less socialist and liberal in economic terms.
Like hell it does. It only hurts those who’s 401k’s are invested in companies with little or no assets, like Google.
Great idea! Wonder if we could take away their EITC money using the same logic?
JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) is one of the oldest financial services firms in the world.....In 1895, Drexel, Morgan & Co. became J.P. Morgan & Co. (see also: John Pierpont Morgan). It financed the formation of the United States Steel Corporation, which took over the business of Andrew Carnegie and others and was the world's first billion-dollar corporation. In 1895, it supplied the United States government with $62 million in gold to float a bond issue and restore the treasury surplus of $100 million. In 1892, the company began to finance the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad and led it through a series of acquisitions that made it the dominant railroad transporter in New England.
“Where, oh where have the supply-siders gone?”
I’m modestly, not religiously, a supply-sider.
I just can’t see how a one-time shot in the checking account will do anything but....pay down some debt....buy a trinket or two....get sucked up by higher gas costs...all of which are fine, but creating jobs, things with repetitive wages that folks can live on? Just can’t see that.
Greenspan's easy credit policy about 20%.
The repeal of Glass-Steagall the other 70 percent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.