Posted on 09/24/2008 10:34:43 AM PDT by HAL9000
Really? How much of a chance will McCain have if the market tanks and we go into a major Depression? If that does happen, who is sitting in the White House in January will have little interest to most of us.
Could you at least wait until he announces it before proclaiming him guilty? And then, be sure to assign blame on both houses of Congress and the President, not just the “socialist bastard” you’ve been focusing on.
"They" already know how "They" got into this. It wasn't "we" and "we" should not have to pay for it.
I blame those who knowingly bought a house they could not pay for just as much as I blame the lenders - predatory or not. I resent helping anyone involved in this at all.
I saved, worked hard, bought what I could afford - I did without a lot of things while preparing to buy our home, I do not want my hard-earned dollars spent bailing out those who just danced into a home lone without effort or sense of fiscal responsibility. I question the constitutionality of the whole thing.
“Really? How much of a chance will McCain have if the market tanks and we go into a major Depression? If that does happen, who is sitting in the White House in January will have little interest to most of us.”
Really? Even if there was a bailout, and even if markets did not tank... Then how do you think the majority who does not want this bailout are going to think of being ignored by there representatives? The Republicans pushing this foremost against there will. And who is to say in the minds of the public that the markets would not have survived anyways? So you see that McCain gets hurt that way too. Probably even more so.
I personally think things are not going to be rosy- bailout or not. But a bailout will make it worse for many reasons. First off the dollar will tank. It will buy a lot less.
I’m agreeing. There will be a bail out.
And I don’t care how it is justified at this point. It is NOT right. UNLESS the Government removes and uses money used for some foreign aide programs and welfare programs and hand outs to illegals and such, they’d have my blessing using that money for the bail out.
The Government needs to tighten their belts and find the money elsewhere - leave the taxpayer alone!
Must be nice to be smarter then the past and present head of the Fed and the Secretary of the Treasury. /sarc
I know how you feel. I have been a victim of this scam without ever taking part in it. I saved for years to buy a house. As I was saving the Bubble was inflating and house prices raised faster than I could save. The interest rates dropped so low that my savings earned almost nothing. Every time the interest would start to go up then the next Bankers ponzi scheme would blow, and the rates would go back down. S$L,.Com bubble, Housing bubble. I have been shafted the whole time while the bankers got rich and people took out loans they could not afford. I still can’t buy a house. The Republicans want to bailout those bankers. The Democrats want to reward those who spend beyond there means. They both want to keep housing prices in the bubble. And they want to take all the money to do that from people like you and me.
ENOUGH! ALREADY!
We bought in 2001, right before the housing boom. Greenspan had just lowered rates for the 3rd time and we locked in at the “historical” rate of 6.25% on a 30 year fixed loan.
I never regretted our choice to move at that time as I watched interest rates plummet and housing cost rising above true worth.
Our acquaintances who didn't work as hard and moved in to “country club” housing normally beyond their means began to (metaphorically speaking) push their noses up in the air at us, in our middle class, 70K home.
I'd like to at least have the last laugh instead of having to support their impudence.
It’s a fact. Legislation was proposed in 2003 to prevent this and the bill was killed by the Democrats.
Well, ole Bush ought to use this occasion to slam the Dems on it....
“A September 11, 2003 New York Times article shows that President Bush proposed “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.” His proposal: An agency within the Treasury Department to supervise mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Fearing that mortgages would no longer be available to people who were unable to pay them back, Democrats eventually killed the proposal. The current meltdown in the mortgage industry is a direct result of giving mortgages to people who could not pay them back, a practice protected by Congressional Democrats.”
Nice acronym.
Reminder to those (like me) without TV or cable: C-SPAN will likely be covering this tonight.
Good Work. However, I just wanted to give you one more quote of President Bush regarding Fannie in Freddie from a Speech he made in 2002.
“And let me talk about some of the progress which we have made to date, as an example for others to follow. First of all, government sponsored corporations that help create our mortgage system — I introduced two of the leaders here today — they call those people Fannie May and Freddie Mac, as well as the federal home loan banks, will increase their commitment to minority markets by more than $440 billion. (Applause.) I want to thank Leland and Franklin for that commitment. It’s a commitment that conforms to their charters, as well, and also conforms to their hearts.”
How’s this the socialist bastards?
I know all about this bill and, although if it became law it might have helped, it is only one part of the huge scam perpetrated by Wall Street. Even without this law the Bush administration had plenty of authority to monitor the financial markets and take action against abuses. They did nothing, either because they are incredibly dim witted or because they had no interest in interfering with the huge amount of money their buddies were making.
There is plenty of blame to go around but the Bush administration was the captain of the ship who was asleep at the wheel when it crashed.
LOL.
That's what I've been saying, but I would prefer it be permanent.
You think Clinton had Chinese strings attached?
That's NOTHING compared to the chains they have on Paulson.
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.