digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at ac360.blogs.cnn.com

Housing crisis worse, Congress takes vacation

ac360.blogs.cnn.com — If you ’re taking some well-deserved rest for the Fourth of July, you are probably getting at best a day or two off around the actual holiday itself. Only in Congress could a break for the “Fourth” become a vacation spanning more than a week.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • sogeshirts, on 07/02/2008, -5/+37They've done such a great job they deserve a retirement.
    • lajaw, on 07/02/2008, -4/+14But, why should they get involved in this? This is the market at work. I say leave it alone and leave the market to take care of it. Those that are in trouble are the same ones that should not have been buying in the first place. They would not be "buyer" in a tighter market. They should and will be "renters".
      • CressCrowbits, on 07/02/2008, -14/+9'Letting the market take care of it' is how the world ended up in this mess in the first place.

        Uncontrolled, unaccountable liberalism can never work.
      • worminater, on 07/02/2008, -2/+5I wouldn't generalize completely, but overall your right; market will work itself out. A little nudge could help though.
      • Gonthim, on 07/02/2008, -4/+13It works perfectly. Stupid people bought things they can't afford, and now they're going bankrupt and loosing all their stuff. I think that's exactly what should happen in this situation. Maybe then they'll stop making such stupid decisions with their money.
      • bobangitanov2, on 07/02/2008, -9/+4Market will work it self out? How? By eliminating the lineage of all the people that are deep in debt and expanding the lower classes? Sorry, but you ARE asking to be eventually mugged. Unless you're deporting poor americans together with illegal immigrants then you can go pick up oranges yourself.
      • diggduggjoe, on 07/02/2008, -0/+10A bankrupt government cannot afford to bail out countless bad loans. No one put a gun to those people's head to take on those crazy loans. All a bail out will do in increase our debt, which will lead to higher inflation hurting the poor and middle class even further. Everyone must start looking at the big picture. Most of the damage occurred due to an extremely loose monetary policy by the fed. If, we do not pull back on the stick soon, this nation is crashing into the earth.
      • Jaablaze, on 07/02/2008, -6/+3while I agree that part of the blame, if not most, is that people purchased homes they really couldn't afford by using subprime morgages and such, I still would like to see some help for these people. Namely because when people go homeless and can't buy what they need, they TAKE what they need. I don't think anyone wants to see the crime rate rise.
      • Nation, on 07/02/2008, -1/+4The issue is that the congress had a hand in causing this problem ... those who say "the market is why this happened" are not entirely correct because congress has meddled with the market keeping it from being truly open and free.

        I wish more people would listen/learn economics ... if you want to consider listening to the stuff you find at www.econtalk.org
      • roflbrothel, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3"'Letting the market take care of it' is how the world ended up in this mess in the first place.

        Uncontrolled, unaccountable liberalism can never work."

        How the ***** is letting the market take care of it liberalism?
      • dromeditor, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5@Jaablaze: "Namely because when people go homeless and can't buy what they need, they TAKE what they need. I don't think anyone wants to see the crime rate rise."

        When lowlifes can't get sex, they rape women. I don't want to see women raped, so we should give them women to have sex with.
      • lajaw, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2@Nation - I'm in the dark here. Just how did congress meddle with the market?
      • Jaablaze, on 07/02/2008, -2/+1dromeditordromeditor,

        several studies have shown that rape is not about sex, but about power and control over the victim. Anyway, I'm not asking for the government to completely bail them out. I would like to see something worked out to at least get them into a position where they aren't losing everything. I wouldn't expect them to be living the lives they had before, but at least enough so they can take care of themselves without resorting to crime. People make mistakes, they make bad decisions. It doesn't mean they don't deserve a little help.
      • thrin, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1@lajaw

        As I understand, it wasn't so much congress, although they might have helped, as it was the Fed artificially lowering interest rates (actually the federal funds rate, which is the interest rate banks charge each other). To do this the Fed buys bonds from the bank with with money it creates on the spot. So the bank that sells bonds to the Fed now has more money to loan to people. However, in order to do this the fed increases the money supply, causing inflation which eventually causes prices to rise. These bubbles occur in the time it takes prices to catch up to the new value of the dollar.

        So lets say you cant afford a house, but the fed lowers interest rates so now you can. You start to pay it off, but then everything else starts to cost more, and the last thing to go up with inflation is wages. So now you can't afford anything, especially the house that you couldn't before hand. And then interest rates go back to where they should have been before the fed interfered, and you are screwed. (this is probably overly simplistic, because there are other factors involved, but it's close enough).
    • ByteGuerilla, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3Retirement by guillotine.
    • digs71874, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1I know everyone's heard this before, but I still think it nails it on the head. If pro is the opposite of con, then what's the opposite of progress?
      • lazyfisherman, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0Holy $@#%, I had not heard that before.
    • aerwin, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2A permanent vacation would be best IMO.
  • AmyVernon, on 07/02/2008, -2/+18i wanna be elected to congress...
    • siszam, on 07/02/2008, -0/+17Yeah, you would get health care and endless vacations at tax payer expense. People love to scream "socialism" when citizens need health care but those who represent us get endless care at our expense.
      • frankingeneral, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Not to mention endless 100%-of-salary pensions!
    • inigomntoya, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4Do you have a suit? Can you read a teleprompter? Can you say yes to your party and no to all others?
      Oh, you aren't sure what the people you represent want? You're hired!
  • rz8472, on 07/02/2008, -20/+13A sad situation; I know that many here on digg are quick to blame the people who took the subprime mortgages, but they are more victims than perpetrators in this matter. Was it they, or companies such as Countrywide, in the unbridled greed, who lobbied a compliant Congress and Executive with PAC money to relax the lending rules knowing full well that the most of the lendees would not be able to pay them back especially with such a high interest rate. Most of the blame lies with the latter.
    • mikesbaker, on 07/02/2008, -2/+25still - you are a moron if you buy a house with no down payment and then only pay the interest on the loan. WTF did you think was going to happen? the banks were in the wrong too because who in their right mind loans out a bunch of money to someone that they know will not be able to pay them back.
      • Phearce, on 07/02/2008, -3/+3Answer: a bank.

        It may not be very ethical, but realistically it's win-win from the bank's point of view. Either they get the interest from the loan, or the property forecloses and they get to start over with the next sucker.
      • onefinalstep, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4Thats the dumbest thing I ever heard. The banks don't want to have these houses on their hands. If they did they would be in the landlord business instead of the capital business. The banks lose money when the house forecloses. No one "won".
    • lajaw, on 07/02/2008, -3/+21I took out a no-doc 15 yr. Countrywide loan 7 years ago, and I paid it off this year. It's not their fault. It's those "flippers" who were in the housing market for a profit. It has finally caught up with them.
    • Mothrog, on 07/02/2008, -2/+14"A sad situation; I know that many here on digg are quick to blame the people who took the subprime mortgages, but they are more victims than perpetrators in this matter."

      What the *****? Victims? If you take a loan out on something you can't afford, you're not a victim, you're a moron.
    • zacharytelschow, on 07/02/2008, -1/+10"Was it they, or companies such as Countrywide, in the unbridled greed..."

      Fine, I can play it from both sides. Countrywide and others were greedy? Good, let them eat their losses. There's only one way for that to happen: NOT bailing out homeowners (and lenders by association).
    • SpinningHead, on 07/02/2008, -2/+6Yes, there are idiots who borrowed more than they could afford, but this was only possible because of those relaxed lending rules. This is what causes people like me, who only paid what I could afford, to get less house for the money because housing prices were driven up. We don't need policies like this which hurt responsible borrowers. Now the global economy is paying for this.
      • onefinalstep, on 07/02/2008, -2/+3Because of those "relaxed lending rules?" So your against the freedom to make your own terms? Listen, you have to let people make mistakes and suffer the consequences without ruining it for the rest of us. No one needs the government to tell them what to do.
      • SpinningHead, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1I'm for regulation, especially when they're lending people money that the rest of us invested. The market doesn't work without regulation. This is exactly what ruins it for the rest of us. We might save so we can afford a 200k house, but so long as people are able to lend a janitor 250k and hes willing to borrow that, the price of that house will remain 250k.
    • thecoolestguy, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2Yes, people who f.uck up are "victims". With your attitude, it's no wonder the government bans drug use, since adults apparently have the intelligence of children and can't legally consent to taking risks with their own bodies and property.
  • Olfster, on 07/02/2008, -2/+28I am almost of the opinion the further these people are from the Capital building in DC the better off this nation is until we all truly find replacements for those that have long needed to retire. We need term limits for congress. Plain and simple.
    • Nosferotu, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2You need to make a better case for term limits than 'plain and simple'. I'm inclined against it, but I'm willing to listen.
      • cubicledrone, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1It's easy. We did it for the Presidency, we can do it for Congress too, using the exact same rationale and through a Constitutional Amendment in order to bypass the inevitable clogged toilet of litigation.

        And if it doesn't work at the Federal level, the states can do it themselves. Congressional delegations belong to the states. The states make the rules.
    • Snarfy, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Shorter terms won't matter when it's the same old lobbyists corrupting the system.
      • Nosferotu, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I'm inclined to agree. If anything, it seems like term limits might enhance the sway of lobbyists - as a senator gains more power in the senate by having been there longer, they will be less susceptible to the pull of a lobbyist. But if every senator had only been there for a maximum of one term previously, they'll all be fresh and not have any pull in Washington, which is unfortunately necessary in order to get things done the way your constituency might want.
  • adml_shake, on 07/02/2008, -3/+5Yeah must be real rough spending your days planning your next fundraiser, and trying to remember that other thing you're supposed to be doing.
  • simplicityiskey, on 07/02/2008, -1/+11I can actually think of at least one other industry where it is common to see people take an entire week off for the Fourth. Not to mention, when you consider how little Congress does anyways and how many of your Congressman are spending more time talking to lobbyist and wasting your tax dollars than actually trying to do something for you, maybe you should be thankful that they're taking a week off. Also, it's not the gubment's job to bail people out of the "housing crisis"--the more they hold you, the more they control you.
  • craighoxton, on 07/02/2008, -4/+11Democracy inaction!
    • ripple123, on 07/02/2008, -5/+7I bet if making crappy jokes hurt, you would be one quiet *****.
  • MCA2142, on 07/02/2008, -4/+4So what else is new?
  • TriTech, on 07/02/2008, -1/+9Why would you think the members of Congress are there to help?
  • ElectricC0wb0y, on 07/02/2008, -2/+36What should Congress care about the housing crisis? Do you really want to pay off some ninny's mortgage with your tax dollars because he can't use a calculator? We are already paying down their mortgages with inflation, thanks to the fed. We don't need to do it with or tax dollars (or taxflation) as well!
    • etoiles, on 07/02/2008, -3/+5The mortgage rates are not directly linked to the interest rates set by the Fed (they actually went up over the last couple months).

      But as a 'reasonable' homeowner I agree, people who bought houses they couldn't afford should not be bailed out with tax dollars!
      • MaynardJK, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4He is talking about inflation from increasing the money supply.
    • 8string, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5It's worse then simply paying off bad mortgages.

      By bailing out 'homeowners' who took mortgages they couldn't afford congress is actually doing grave harm to the economy. I sold my house in 2004. I hadn't bought it to flip it, but in essence I did. I lived there for 2 years and sold for personal reasons. I have been waiting to buy another home since then. I miss owning a house, but I can't bring myself to pay 500k for an 1100 sq ft home that would have sold for 200k a few years ago. By bailing out these irresponsible borrowers congress is artificially keeping real estate prices high. A massive bubble formed, it's imploding now, and in order for the economy (or at least the housing market) to be healthy again prices must correct themselves. Stated simply, until the median home price in a given area is affordable by the median income the bubble hasn't corrected itself.
  • greaseddeafguy, on 07/02/2008, -3/+4I wish they would stay on vacation. But way to go Fairfax, on coming up with a solution that benefits dedicated public servants!
    • lajaw, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Yea, housing projects for civil servants!
  • perogi21, on 07/02/2008, -3/+25It's not up to Congress to save the imbeciles from themselves no matter how many laws they want to pass.
    • spawnfree, on 07/02/2008, -9/+1so its OK for smarter people to scam them?

      lets change that from mental to physical; its OK for children to be raped because they are not strong enough to resist?
      its OK to rob your neighbor because you can beat him up?
      • ElectricC0wb0y, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6The banks scammed themselves. Unfortunately, the banks were saved by the fed :(
      • Gonthim, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3Yea, sorry, the only reason a lot of the banks haven't completely collapsed is because the government helped them out. If they had instead just sat back and watched the horror unfold a majority of the banks would be wiped out by now. I can't really call that a smart investment on the banks part.
      • nicc, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5@spawnfree

        HOW did the the home buyer get scammed?

        unless the mortgage company changed the details of the mortgage finance/payment without telling the buyer (and not giving them a new GFE) the it is strictly the buyers fault for need reading the details or not knowing how to budget.
        the buyer knows ALL terms in advance of closing.
      • Mothrog, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6Uh, yeah. A child getting raped and some ***** signing up for a loan he can't afford are totally the same thing. You don't have to be too bright to add up your expenses and figure out what you can and cannot afford. If people can't be bothered to take that step, and they lose everything, that's just too ***** bad. Maybe they'll break out a calculator the next time.
      • spawnfree, on 07/02/2008, -2/+2ok, the scam is not that apparent, but there is a serious and evil motive behind the credit crunch.
        the banks do have the ability to create paper money out of nothing using a very convoluted system.
        the American government is very much dependent on the banks and has been under their thumb since the fed was set up almost 100 years ago.
        The government can borrow as much money as needed to stabilise the 'economy' just as it happend a few months back when the fed was injecting billions. im not the only one who remembers that, surely.
        So what is the long term plan of this system? well what is it doing. it is slowly leaving the vast majority of americans with no material possesions. just debt.
        debt is slavery.
  • newms32, on 07/02/2008, -1/+27Good, because Congress has nothing to do with the housing crisis. This legislation is ineffective ***** that's designed to boost politicians' election hopes at the cost of forcing all American taxpayers to pay for the mistakes of a few.
  • maxthethird, on 07/02/2008, -4/+14http://digg.com/business_finance/Sign_the_Petition ...

    Help stop federal funding for housing bailout. Why should we pay for their mistakes?
    • Mothrog, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3When the hell has yet another stupid ass Internet petition ever done anything?
    • Lugano, on 07/02/2008, -1/+5Yes! An online petition, now we're getting somewhere! They won't be able to ignore us anymore!
      • kildurin, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3While I disagree with the method, I agree with the sentiment
  • kahrytan, on 07/02/2008, -8/+1Like you can trust the Communist News network to be accurate.
  • andergriff, on 07/02/2008, -1/+13The longer Congress stays on vacation, the better our chances of a quicker recovery. There is a direct relationship between how much Congress meddles in the economy, and how bad the economy actually is. So if you want to get out of this as soon as possible, call your congressman and ask him/her to do NOTHING.
  • Kevin108, on 07/02/2008, -1/+22Quit waiting for the government to bail you out of the financial mess you got yourself into.
  • homah, on 07/02/2008, -1/+12Good, let the market sort itself out.
  • nastronomical, on 07/02/2008, -1/+11Stop grovelling for help from your politicians, it can only lead to something worse.
  • nkfallout, on 07/02/2008, -2/+9Congress is not intended to 'fix' our financial problems. If you got into bad debt thats your fault... You should pay the consequences. Plain and Simple. The the banks fault and let the people lose their homes. The economy will suffer but thats what it needs.. If we don't pay for it now our grand children will pay more. Lobby Congress to go on Vacation. The more Vacation they take the less debt they make.
    • Handcannons, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0More accurately if they (the people who got bad loans) don't pay for it then our (yours, mine and their) children will be paying for it. Personally I'd much rather the morons who got into the mess sink or swim on their own.
    • cubicledrone, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0While we're at it let's just repeal all the regulations on loans. Let 'em charge whatever they want and let them lie to get the business. Just let them flat out lie in the faces of people to get them to sign.

      In fact, let's just repeal contract law too while we're at it. If they want to break the contract unilaterally, let them! In fact, let them call the loan halfway through and give the occupants 72 hours to get out of the house.

      But make absolutely sure borrowers are held to the letter of the law. If they are one cent short, they should lose everything they own. Every last ***** dime. If you got into a bad debt it's your own fault. Tough *****.
  • Meekus, on 07/02/2008, -1/+33When I bought my house, I shopped around for the best rate I could find. I asked alot of questions. I knew EXACTLY what I was getting into. I knowingly went into a variable to keep payments low the first couple of years, and then refi'd into a nice comfortable fixed when rates were very low. And you know what? I am getting by decently - I have money to support my family decently. I'm not out spending money I don't have.

    So tell me, why in the hell should I pay to bail out someone else's lack of common sense? I don't mean to sound harsh, but, supporting MY FAMILY is my priority - not the person who made poor decisions and spent way beyond their means. And I refuse to allow the government to take away from my family to pay for these people. I am already taxed to the hilt.

    Government: Mind your own damn business and stay the hell out of my life as much as possible. Why not try something novel and protect my liberty for once instead of stealing money from me. Go read the constitution and actually see what your TRUE purpose is!
    • frankingeneral, on 07/02/2008, -3/+2The TRUE and and ultimate goal of this, or any government, is to protect it's citizenry. A bailout isn't just about protecting those people who made a stupid decision. If it was only about that than most certainly let the bastards suffer teh consequences. But to stand idly by while the housing market goes completely to *****, because it will get worse, is going to affect everyone in this country except the wealthiest of individuals. When your home's value has deteriorated to the point that you have negative equity in your home you'll probably be singing a different tune. When that happens it will have nothing to do with the good decisions you made or how well you managed your money, it will have to do with the stupid decisions others made, which is why this affects everyone and action is needed.
      • vonmises05, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Wrong. Economics 101 in a free market. Mortgages are going under, banks raise interest and lending rates, its harder to buy a house, prices go down, then people who saved and couldn't afford will buy them when the prices are right. That will stabilize rates. With the next wave of people buying houses, moving out of renting, construction will begin and the housing market will pick back up.

        Bail out the reckless borrowers and most importantly the lenders with the Federal government, and you will notice the phenomenon of a mortgage crisis over and over. This is what is known as creating a moral hazard. Reward the reckless financial medium, and they will realize they can loan out as much as they want, then take a slap on the wrist in order to be bailed out by the government.

        And the initial argument holds true. It's our money. We're already paying for older folks to retire and play golf all day. I'm not paying for mortgages now....
      • unii, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2In case you are not aware of math... Let me be frank :
        There are two cases :
        -> Tax payers who had nothing to do w/ this pay for the bailout
        -> Dumb home owners and banks pay for it....
        ---------
        Pick one... Regardless, there will be consequences in the future for case #1 or consequences in the present for case #2 ...
        The fair and just thing is case #2 .. In which case, there is a positive which is that potential homeowners who are renting and saving can finally afford homes...

        What you are suggesting is govt. intervention to support inflation (inflated home prices) because a few idiots decided to speculate.... WOW, if I must say so and WOW if you don't see it this way...

        Asset deflation causes serious ills. However, so does inflation... Asset deflation is waged against the morons who have there hands to it.. Inflation affects EVERYONE !!!

        How about this? The fed lets home prices fall through the floor to affordable fair value levels.. Lets all of the people who couldn't afford homes to get kicked out ... and uses the bailout money it was going to give to these people to provide tax breaks and other things to potential home owners who have 20% to put down and buy the home. How about that one? Those other fools can go and rent and their punishment for being stupid and causing the economy issues will be taxes levied against them to back the tax breaks for the people who had to wait 5-10 years while they were out dicking around w/ home prices.

        The ignorance. Laziness and attitude of give me's and handouts disgusts me in this country... What ever happened to acting like you have an ounce of sense ... (common sense)? What ever happened to accountability. I sometimes look around this nation and can't help but think that we are doomed when I see people buy into the things like 'bailing out these "homeowners" and crying pity them". Dry up your eyes and act like you have some integrity
      • Meekus, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I don't believe the goal of, nor role of government is to protect it's citizenry in the manner you suggest. In fact, the US Constitution says quite the opposite. We are a republic for good reason. The moment we accept the notion that government should take care of us from cradle to grave is the moment we accept the deterioration of our individual rights - which is what the government's TRUE and ultimate goal as was intended by our founders.

        My money is my property. It is the fruits of my labor. By government forcibly taking it away by way of taxation, in an effort to pay someone else's failed mortgage is stealing from me.

        In regards to the economics of this, the more government intervenes, the worse things will get. I realize these programs are done with the best of intentions, however never do those intentions measure up to the actual result.

        If people can not afford their mortgage because the market is trying to balance itself back out - they will not be able to afford it later on after signing up for said government program. They will then become dependent on said government program. They must then meet all the criteria and regulation by said government program. Now, there is another layer of complexity and bureaucracy involved with this person's property. Who is responsible if they continue to default? Moreover, if the government becomes also the money lenders.... do they then own the properties after it gets foreclosed upon? This is a road America does NOT want to go down for a multitude of reasons.

        It sucks people get themselves into trouble, but we simply can NOT look to government to bail us out. Why? Because if government can grant these things, they will then be empowered to revoke these things.
    • cgruber, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1As a home owner and parent of 2 (soon to be 3!) I couldn't agree more.
  • Guncrazy, on 07/02/2008, -1/+29I am a responsible adult who purchased a home with a mortgage that I could afford. It would make more sense for Congress to reward me, and other responsible Americans, for helping to not ***** up the economy.

    Congress has no business, and no Constitutional authority, to bail out the morons who got themselves into this mess. More pressing, however, is that they don't know they can't fix it. At best, they'll just delay the consequences, making things worse in the long run.

    You want to fix the housing crisis? SUCK IT UP.
  • sfacets, on 07/02/2008, -0/+7Yeah... might be a good time to get rid of Congress. Have they done anything they are supposed to as supposed representatives of the people? Obviously the Checks and Balances system doesn't work anymore.
  • aupton, on 07/02/2008, -0/+14YAY Undeserving pieces of ***** get rewarded!
  • Zippo, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3Gotta love the government... no matter what country you go to; Government workers have the biggest responsibilities, work the least, and have the most holidays... and they don't even get that much done when they are working.
    It seems that the higher up you are in government, the less you work.

    No wonder ***** all gets done. Canada and the US alike.
  • mdude85, on 07/02/2008, -2/+12Oh Puhlease. Anybody with the mental processing power just surpassing that of a chimp, knows that Congress takes a recess like this every year, regardless of the state of the economy. People who think this is a "cop out" for Congress not to address the housing issue are simply foolish. How can you not cringe when these people enter a voting booth come November??? Feel free to Digg me down now.
    • JimSwarthow, on 07/02/2008, -2/+2just b/c Congress has always acted criminally irresponsible w/ any and all duties bestowed on them by the people(dupes!) who got them there in the first place doesn't let them off the hook. well, at least not unless you're one of the dupes who still doesn't get it.

      it's not a "cop out", it's business-as-usual.
      • mdude85, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1Taking a recess from work -- especially one that is planned -- is not irresponsible or criminal, regardless of your line of work
    • vonmises05, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1mdude85
      Why don't you go wander over to the sports area of Digg, if you insist on calling those who know more about the responsibility of elected officials and the history of this nation "chimps". George Washington did not take breaks when our nation was struggling for Freedom in the War for Independence, not when there was work to be done. They could easily take a break after they resolve the housing bill. They are lazy; go to the senate chamber and take a look around. You commonly have one or two senators there, one to propose legislation and the other to attack it. They rarely actually work at their job, which is passing legislation ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION.
      • mdude85, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0As a resident of Washington DC myself, I see more than my fair share of senate and congressional ineptitude and absence from the capitol ----- however, the blog insinuates that the july 4 holiday recess was some sort of twisted plan by congress not to address the housing issue. that is a false notion. In fact I would not be surprised if the bill was purposefully introduced at a time so that final votes on it might coincide with the recess, in order to make the democratic majority appear fallible or lazy.

        If you think that George Washington did not take breaks when our national was "struggling for freedom in the war for independence" then you have not found your reading of history to be close to whole.
  • compuwarescc, on 07/02/2008, -1/+6Week long vacations are not unreasonable for legislators. Consider the fact that many of them commute across the whole damn country to get to work. Do you want your legislators to never be in your home states? They need to be with their families sometimes and they need to be in the state they are representing to keep perspective. That's not to say they shouldn't say take some of that time off to read one or two bills they intend to pass (as opposed to not reading any of them), but give them a break - the job dictates long vacations.
    • vanguardanon, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I was about to write something similar. The only difference is that I wouldn't call it a vacation at all. They are just going to do a different job (meeting with locals, raising money, getting known in their district) I wouldn't call it vacation.

      They aren't home all that often, I bet this time is actually pretty packed for them.
    • Handcannons, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Since I didn't vote for the legislators from my state, no I don't want them to come back - ever. Sadly the people here keep voting in the same idiots year after year after year...
  • JimSwarthow, on 07/02/2008, -1/+7y'mean the Party of Change-controlled Congress is acting just like the last guys?? whu?? but, but, they said.. I thought they were gonna..

    if you're not voting 3rd party you're part of the problem.
    • Ninjaneer, on 07/02/2008, -7/+13rd party voters are the reason Bush is in office now.
      • JimSwarthow, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2no, more people voting for Bush than voting for Gore is the reason Bush is in office now. quite making excuses for you swallowing (hook-line-and-sinker) the bad-joke that is the "2-party system". - it doesn't have to be that way. it's only that way b/c the American voter has no backbone and is willing to compromise their ethics and morals. not me, Bub.
      • frankingeneral, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Actually less people voted for Bush than voted for Gore:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_preside ...

        Just figured I'd point that out.
      • JimSwarthow, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3and Clinton won w/ just 43% in 1992. - obviously I was referring to the Electoral College (what really counts).
      • Handcannons, on 07/02/2008, -1/+0Third party voters is why we had 8 years of Clinton, not Bush.
      • JimSwarthow, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1yep, that's the party-line alright (pun intended, btw) -

        look, are you gonna just acquiesce and choose the lesser of 2 evils for the rest of your life? and your kids?? and their kids??? and their kids' kids???? - when are you and the rest the U.S. gonna wake-the-fk-up and grow some ethical-balls? most likely I'll never see the fruits of my labors.. but my kids might. and I'll go to the grave knowing it wasn't me and my milquetoast morals responsible for the wreck this country is becoming.

        the U.S. gets lots of flak for always going the instant-gratification route.. always wanting everything NOW b/c we don't wanna wait and/or set long-term goals. hell, China has public-works projects scheduled to finish/start 50 years from now! y'know why? they're not just thinking of themselves and the here & now, they're thinking of the greater good and future generations. - people don't seem to have a problem w/ the "for our children's sake let's stop globalclimatewarmingchange!" and "bring down the national debt! it's not fair to our children!" and so on.. why not bite the bullet w/ the way you vote?? or are you actually that delusional that you believe voting for Obama or McCain is beneficial for this country??
    • frankingeneral, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Why does it have to be about balls or me being delusional??? You're so wrapped up in your own self-righteousness that you can't even fathom the fact that not everyone is going to agree with your opinion on everything. I value your opinions and go right ahead, continue to vote 3rd party. But there is no reason to belittle me because I happen to agree with a major party candidate more than any other candidate. Do I think my candidate is perfect, no, but he's the best around, including the 3rd party candidates. As a well educated individual I pride myself on knowing facts and issuses, and I select a candidate accordingly.
  • t4m5t3r, on 07/02/2008, -3/+3and what do the brave freedome fighting americans do about it?


    oh yeah..............................................NOTHING!! (as usual)

    "You want to fix the housing crisis? SUCK IT UP. "


    or mabey go after the people responsible for ruining your country? its kinda hard to suck it up when you and your kids are living under a bridge!!
    • Rahodeb, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1"or mabey go after the people responsible for ruining your country"

      What's your great big plan of action? Grab a gun and "go after" congress?
      • t4m5t3r, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1lol, what has congress done? except be ignored?

        i suppose their inaction is just as much to blame as bush and co, so yeah, might aswell get rid of the lot of them and start fresh!

        thats kinda the point of having the right to bear arms is it not?
    • Mothrog, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2"and what do the brave freedome fighting americans do about it?"

      Freedom includes the possibility of doing something stupid, and accepting the consequences thereof.
      • t4m5t3r, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1you might want to tell that to the people in charge m8!
    • roflbrothel, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Wait? Americans get FREE DOMES!? HOLY *****! I'M MOVING TO AMERICA!
  • JasonCox, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5I wish I had as many vacations as Congressmen have... Hell, I'd just settle for their damn salary!
  • someuserQU, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6the problem with politicians is they only have to be good at one thing, and that one thing is getting elected. They do not have to good at problem solving, managing people, spending tax payer money etc.

    Next time you go to the polls check the person background. Try to vote for someone that has done something prior to political office. Examples: Self made millionaire, successful business person, CEO of a large company, etc

    if you vote for a idiot that you like for no reason other then that he or she sounds like they know what they are talking about, then you can except them to hurt the country or city

    a Parrot can say "I can fix all the current problems" and not say how he or she will fix the problems.
    • zacharytelschow, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2See: Barack Obama (also listed under "Change").
  • dmbchris, on 07/02/2008, -3/+2You know, it's not like they are taking this "vacation" to lie on the beach or anything. They are for certain working, but in their home state, going to events and meeting local leaders. Congressmen can rarely afford to take any real time off.
  • 420ilerBuzzed, on 07/02/2008, -2/+5Do you really think the government gives a rat's ass about the average Joe? Nope.
  • Rutje, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3At least they're not making it worse!
    But of course that will be compensated when they return from their absence....
  • 9bpm9, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3They take this vacation every year, don't just take a big issue and seemingly connect it with the fact that congress has taken this exact same vacation for years.
  • YodaJones, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2My computer runs the housing Crysis at a pretty high frame rate.
  • bobangitanov2, on 07/02/2008, -2/+1Market will work it self out? How? By eliminating the lineage of all the people that are deep in debt and expanding the lower classes? Sorry, but you ARE asking to be eventually mugged. Unless you're deporting poor americans together with illegal immigrants then you can go pick up oranges yourself.
  • thewump, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5"homeowners on the edge to get new mortgages backed by the federal government." ( ie backed by MY money ). I'd rather they stay on vacation than sign this piece of *****.
  • Birdie1111, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3Government is no longer For the People, By the People. It is a citizen tax-funded country club. These politicians could care less if the citizens are suffering. They do nothing about the gas prices except come out with more rhetoric. When are we the citizens going to wake up and Throw the Bums out. Where is Nancy Pelosi now, and Harry Reid wants to take us backwards. I can't believe this.
    We need term limits and we need First to get those Democrats out!!!
    This will get worse and worse the more power they attain.
  • amightywind, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5Why does congress feel obligated to subsidize borrows and lenders who made a bad business decisions and extend the crisis. Let the foreclosure process work. Long term, it is a good thing.
  • Nymphe, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBqwtRubyJM

    There are roughly 100 million homes in the US and between 50-60 homes under mortgages. The actual percentage of homes in trouble is less than 4%. Don't believe the hype! All this pollitical grandstanding is getting on my last damn nerve.

    The best bailout plan is to force the BANKS to return the money they got from these people with interest so they can find somewhere else to live. Let the BANKS eat properties and losses. If they fail, good riddance, I say.
  • zacharytelschow, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5If your house is upside down or you can't afford it, tough crap. Why should the rest of us bail you and the banks stupid enough to lend you more than you can afford out?
  • cereal1, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Actually, I have a week off for the 4th as well. Next year it'll be 13 days, the year after will be 7 again.
  • jesusfish, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3I wish they'd take a week off every month. Maybe even two weeks...
  • Number23, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5The last thing congress should so is bail out banks and homeowners that made stupid lending decisions. You can bet if their home prices were still climbing they wouldn’t be sending me a check.

    Public losses and private gains is not a way to run an economy. The one thing capitalism does best is punish bad behavior. The best way resolve the housing crisis is for housing prices to return to historical levels of affordability.

  • cronian, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Congress should not be bailing anyone out. However, I do think new bankruptcy laws might be useful to the crisis. If lender can't pay, and the mortgage is for more than the house's current valuation, the borrower should be able to declare bankruptcy, and the lender should be forced to reduce the principle on the loan to no more than the house's current market value. If the bankruptcy court determines, the borrower can pay this principle at the previous interest rate, they should be allowed to do so. However, the federal government shouldn't be guaranteeing anything. If the lender still can pay, the bank should foreclose, and suffer their loses. Congress should also make sure the banks aren't playing games to hide their loses.
  • EarlOfLade, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3A few days? Ehhh no,nonbonono....
    I have 5 weeks paid vacation, why would anyone want any less?
  • CHANNELOCK, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1The Banks want to prolong the wannabe home owners indentured servitude ,milk the suckers for an extra year by giving them false hope.
    The banks are happy,the city still gets its property tax and the poor wannabe owners will still be broke
    • onefinalstep, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Yeah, the banks are making sooooo much money from these bankrupt people ...
  • mrzack, on 07/02/2008, -1/+6I thought in a Free-Market capitalist system the government doesn't intervene? ***** this socialist communist country.
  • timothy53, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3so how many days does congress get off? uncle jay explains...
    http://www.thisisjuststupid.com/stupid-politicians ...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.