CPAPtalk.com

Privatized benefit with socialized risk - hasn't that been the recurring MO for the current administration?
http://www.phoenixvillenews.com/site/ne ... 5495&rfi=6

I'd rather see money go to help unsuspecting homeowners who were wooed into financial ruin by bad banking policies first.

DreamDiver wrote:Privatized benefit with socialized risk - hasn't that been the recurring MO for the current administration?
http://www.phoenixvillenews.com/site/ne ... 5495&rfi=6

I'd rather see money go to help unsuspecting homeowners who were wooed into financial ruin by bad banking policies first.

DD, That is a good article.

As he points out:

This seems like a nightmare, but the most amazing part of the whole affair is that many in Washington are still committed to the basics of the Fannie and Freddie model — the model that is based on taxpayer backing of debt in order to allow a quasi-private company to privatize billions of dollars in profit on the assumption that losses would be socialized and the taxpayers left to foot the bill.

...........

Fannie and Freddie must be dismembered. They should be divided up and sold off. The private financial markets will be able to provide the capital services in their place, and lawmakers can go back to the drawing board to find policies that encourage home ownership without putting the taxpayers on the hook for trillions of dollars in liability.

We need to send better people to Washington but it won't happen in the next term.

The "better people" are too smart and have too much integrity to get involved in the politics needed to get elected - or appointed.

Instead of electing our leaders for a set term of office, they should have 6 months, with the option for another 6 months. Based on their "Poorformance". (Not A Misspelling), They can be retained in office up to 6 years. We need to set up a long list of applicants for the positions, stricter rules need to be set for qualification. (Such as you must have had a real job and actually have made something that was useful.) The people that apply need to be looked over harder than if they were applying for a job at 7/11. False statments on the job app should be grounds for not being considered, and should come with jail time. Jim

packitin wrote: ... Now, they say we ALL owe Unc Sam over $2300 dollars to help pay for the bailout. ...

Jay, I read that it will be $10,000 PER HOUSEHOLD for JUST THIS bailout.

That does it! I'd better hope my car lasts ANOTHER 12 years!! As it is, most of what USED to be my house payment still has to be set aside for the darn property taxes. The property taxes that would be LOWERED if Michiganders were dumb enough to approve a 6% sales tax. So now we have a 6% sales tax AND high property taxes. AND a lottery to support our schools instead of monies from what used to be ear marked funds from the general state budget. AND gambling casinos to give our state legislators even more money to blow. Instead of good paying industrial jobs that have all gone overseas.

Slinky-for president
Goofproof-for vice president

Problem solved.

Goofproof wrote:Instead of electing our leaders for a set term of office, they should have 6 months, with the option for another 6 months. Based on their "Performance". (Not A Misspelling), They can be retained in office up to 6 years. We need to set up a long list of applicants for the positions, stricter rules need to be set for qualification. (Such as you must have head a real job and actually have made something that was useful.) The people that apply need to be looked over harder than if they were applying for a job at 7/11. False statments on the job app should be gronds for not being considered, and should come with jail time. Jim

... and they must be able to pronounce "nuclear" correctly, unlike Bush and Palin who pronounce it "nookyoular".

rooster wrote:We need to send better people to Washington but it won't happen in the next term.

We need to send a message even if it does not result in "better" people in Washington ... vote third party!!

Are you guys, yokin'? WHY do you think I insist on my credit card limit of $1000??? I learned the hard way in my younger years that I'm not the most fiscally responsible person when it comes to credit. I've insisted on maintaining a $1000 limit since then. Every year the CC company offers to raise my limit and every year I have to tell them NO! If I ever owed $5000 on a credit card I'd keel over from a heart attack!!! You should have seen me bleed and cry the first time I had to pay $10,000 for a car!!!! My financial mind-set is still stuck back in the 60s!!

Goofproof wrote: ... False statments on the job app should be gronds for not being considered, and should come with jail time.

Shades of Joe Biden's forced helicopter down in Afghanistan and Hillary's landing under gunfire in ... wherever it was!! And BushBaby's Air National Guard service ... and ... Palin's mid East ... and ...

Oh, and by the way, does anyone remember the congressional banking scandal back in the .... I forget the years now. But these guys are in charge of the US government's spending and budget ???? Gimme a break! No wonder this country is in the shape it is in!

Goofproof wrote:Instead of electing our leaders for a set term of office, they should have 6 months, with the option for another 6 months. Based on their "Performance". .........

GP, We are in this sorry state but we keep electing the same people over and over. The incumbent win rate is always over 90%.

Paraphrasing someone famous, "With a democratic vote, the people get the government they deserve."

DS, A third party is the way to go.

Slinky wrote: ..........
And why reward those who can't control their credit card spending?? I have ONE credit card which I insist be kept at a $1000 limit. My husband has an unlimited credit card but ALWAYS keeps his charges low enough he can pay the entire balance every 30 days.

We FINALLY paid off our 30 year home loan. Before we retired we replaced the roof - with cash. We replaced the furnace - with cash. We purchased new appliances - with cash. AS WE COULD AFFORD THEM. Everybody else was running around making home equity loans to put on additions, etc., etc. WHO the devil needs a BIGGER house after the kids are all out on their own and there is just the two of you? We need to replace some windows. We are doing that - with cash, one or two at a time AS WE CAN AFFORD THEM.

Way to go Slinky. Excellent individual responsibility. You are exceptional.

At least at some gut level (where it is most important), you understand risk/reward, benefit/cost, cash flow and marginal analysis. You are excused from getting a PhD in Economics.

If we can't get you in the Cabinet, we need to get you on the road giving seminars to high school and college students.

[quote="Slinky That does it! I'd better hope my car lasts ANOTHER 12 years!! As it is, most of what USED to be my house payment still has to be set aside for the darn property taxes. The property taxes that would be LOWERED if Michiganders were dumb enough to approve a 6% sales tax. So now we have a 6% sales tax AND high property taxes. AND a lottery to support our schools instead of monies from what used to be ear marked funds from the general state budget. AND gambling casinos to give our state legislators even more money to blow. Instead of good paying industrial jobs that have all gone overseas.[/quote]

You've got it bad!, My cars are both 30 years old now. They will last another 12 years. I've used credit cards for 20 years, during that time I've paid $3.82 in interest (do to a CC that charged INS from time of purchase, not the norm) I now have CC's that pay me to use them, I made about $200 on them in the last year. I never buy a house that's better than I need, but I took a bath selling the last house, the government never bailed me out. I don't need the government to tell me what to do, I need them to leave me bee. I keep a mouse trap in my pocket with my billfold. Jim

I think I have the bailout soultion ...

It is based on an economic model made popular in the 80's ... trickle down voodoo or something like that.

First you total the last 4 years of income for every person in the US. Then starting with the folks who earned the highest amounts, have them pay 50% of their last 4 years of gross income and continue down the income ladder until the $700 billion is met ... by the time it gets to the common people like most (if not all) of us, we won't have to pay anything.

Ahhhhh! DreamStalker!! I LIKE your suggestion!

Like my grandfather used to say, " do not trust anyone who spends more to get a job than the job pays" & "don't vote, it just encourages them".

I also want to die in my sleep like my grandfather did, not like the others in the car that were screaming!

Don't Vote, follow the second amendment, arm yourselves. Jim