What is Digg?23 Comments
- Y0tsuya, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8It would be a colossal waste of taxpayer money to bail out these irresponsible morons (borrowers and lenders alike), which is why it will probably go through. They should just let the market correct itself. The last time they tried fixing the Nasdaq stock bubble we ended up with this housing bubble in worse shape. But looks like the taxpayers will again be asked to bail out the idiots so they can go on to make their next mistake.
- spickus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Dextrose
Good comment. It's true that borrowers put themselves in that position and don't deserve to be bailed out but neither do the banks. What chaps me is that many of these loans would not default if the bank did not increase the interest rate. I know everyone involved agreed to those terms but its obvious that BOTH the borrower and the lender are at fault. I'm amazed that the lien holder would rather lose money (by raising rates and forcing a default) than make a modest profit (by converting loan to fixed rate at or near original rate). Banks aren't run by idiots, they must strongly believe that the government will bail them out of their self imposed mess and at a profit no less.
- backup000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I've been a long time Dem and I've supported them with my votes. If they do bail these morons out, then I will make sure that the Rep representatives get at least 2 votes from me and my girlfriend. What the hell are they thinking? Wasting my money on irresponsible people like that. I've been renting because I knew that I wouldn't be able to pay the mortgage payments. Say NO to the bailout and make people realize that they have to be responsible for their own actions.
- Dextrose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, unfortunately the issue is bigger than that. I personally believe that nobody -- and I mean NOBODY held a gun to these borrowers' heads and made them sign on the dotted line. They willfully signed!! Signed knowing in many cases that THEY THEMSELVES didn't take the time to bother reading the fine print -- because it doesn't matter -- housing always goes up!! These people are greedy, selfish, liars -- that couldn't wait and had to have it now! Gimme gimme gimme!!
How about give ME and all the rest -- of the honest hard working Americans who WAS / IS / ARE responsible -- a break!!!
And if the mortgage company that sold the subprime loan is not going to get any help (as they currently ARE NOT receiving any help -- and yes many of those companies ARE folding) -- then why should the borrower be helped? I can tell you why -- because our government sucks and we have a bunch of political puppets trying to buy votes for the upcoming election next year. Disgusting!
So now you have a ***** ton of low class filth moving into neighborhoods that they don't belong in -- because under typical circumstances they would NOT have qualified for the loan that they just lied on the application to get -- and they would still be renting!!
So now the neighborhood that they just moved into and are now sharing the house with two or three other families -- is devalued by the excessive number of broken down and busted looking cars parked out front in the driveway and on the street. And the neighborhood will become even further devalued when these dirt bags finally foreclose and the house is repossessed and sold for cheap.
This country disgusts me sometimes and these propositions by political puppets to bail these scum bags out (basically trying to BUY votes) is the final nail in the coffin. - Dextrose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well, I guess the way the bigger picture unfolds when it comes to these loans is that they are packaged and then resold to investors etc. -- some of which include Wall St.? I'm no guru when it comes to that. Also, I believe that some of these loans are backed or converted into or whatever -- by bonds -- and I'm sure part of the deal was that the return on those bonds was/is contingent up the interest rate hikes that you speak about.
In the end, I don't think it's simply a matter of "just not raising" the interest rates -- because now some other person has purchased a bond based on these loans etc. And what? He's now not going to get the guaranteed fixed rate return on his bond purchase that he supposed to get? I may be way off mark (I'm no mortgage / bond / securities expert / guru) but I believe the scenario goes something like that.
So something like that is why it's way more complicated than simply not raising the rates on the resetting loans. I'll buy (for a little while at least) the argument that "some" of the lending practices were waaaay too lax and loose and in some cases fraudulent. But in the end -- the borrower that signed on the dotted line is ultimately responsible for either being greedy or simply not doing his / her homework. And the last time I didn't do my homework -- I failed the test and failed the course. And the same should go for these flunkies as well. :) - Afreyt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If owners can default on these loans because they have difficulty paying, and the government will step in and pay for them, then I intend to "have difficulty" paying my loans and let the government to step in and pay for mine. And if everyone does that, it will kill this program before it gets out of the door.
- spickus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I've got an idea. Why don't these lenders set the interest rates back to the original rate (I'm referring to the ARM loans) ? That way the borrower can keep the home they bought, the bank doesn't take possession of a home that is worth less than is owed on it and I don't have to pay for the fraud perpetrated on the financial institution that bought the loan in good faith. Another thought, let's start seizing the assets of the mortgage companies that put $30K/yr wage earners in $300K homes. Liar loans are fraud, not only has the borrower committed fraud but the original lender has not exercised due diligence. I scrimped and saved for 15 years to build the house I'm in (a modest house at that). Now I as a tax pay am expected to maximize the banks profit? *****! The bank has not and will not lose money IF they don't repo the home.
- spickus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"And the last time I didn't do my homework -- I failed the test and failed the course. And the same should go for these flunkies as well. :)"
I think that sums it up rather well. I just don't think that the borrowers and lenders are the only ones who are going to pay for this debacle. - max12376, on 03/29/2008, -0/+0Mr. Government, please bail me out of my crappy stock investments. It's only fair. I took a risk, and lost. Now come save me.
- kadams20, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Everytime I go on the internet, I find more and more people like myself who are simply disgusted with the notion of a bailout for greedy stupid people.
It's so nice to see some people in this country still recognize that those of us who were responsible and recognized that there was something horribly wrong with the stratospheric prices of housing and chose to wait it out, should not be responsible for those who recklessly (and probably fraudulently) took on more house than they could afford.
Congress: let the market forces restore housing prices back to where they belong. There will no longer be a housing crisis if prices return to normal. I for one will buy one, if you don't interfere. - kadams20, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Everytime I go on the internet, I find more and more people like myself who are simply disgusted with the notion of a bailout for greedy stupid people.
It's so nice to see some people in this country still recognize that those of us who were responsible and recognized that there was something horribly wrong with the stratospheric prices of housing and chose to wait it out, should not be responsible for those who recklessly (and probably fraudulently) took on more house than they could afford.
Congress: let the market forces restore housing prices back to where they belong. There will no longer be a housing crisis if prices return to normal. I for one will buy one, if you don't interfere. - spickus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1And so it begins:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18184371/ - Aaronius, on 02/26/2009, -0/+0Where's the personal responsibility? It seems like proponents of the bailouts always use the argument, "But if you don't bail out the people who are being foreclosed, it will hurt your own home's value!" I UNDERSTAND. Yes, my own home's value may decrease, but I would rather have it cut in half than degrade the value of personal responsibility.
http://aaronhardy.com/life-in-general/the-bailout- ...
http://aaronhardy.com/life-in-general/thank-you-fo ... - kadams20, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Everytime I go on the internet, I find more and more people like myself who are simply disgusted with the notion of a bailout for greedy stupid people.
It's so nice to see some people in this country still recognize that those of us who were responsible and recognized that there was something horribly wrong with the stratospheric prices of housing and chose to wait it out, should not be responsible for those who recklessly (and probably fraudulently) took on more house than they could afford.
Congress: let the market forces restore housing prices back to where they belong. There will no longer be a housing crisis if prices return to normal. I for one will buy one, if you don't interfere - mbuitron, on 09/26/2008, -0/+0I posted my letters I wrote to my senators here:
http://imoralist.blogspot.com/2008/09/galbraith-sa ...
and the day after I came across the Op-Ed piece in the Post which I posted too. - rasama, on 09/27/2008, -0/+0I have sent your letters to my congressmen and senator, as well as sharing it will all my friends... Great writing. You stand up for what many others agree with.
- smartenup, on 10/28/2008, -0/+0Let's wake up and require people to be RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS! I knew that I couldn't afford an expensive house, so I didn't buy one. I've been renting because it made financial sense. Why should I be punished now while deadbeats get rescued from their greed?
- Madmax911, on 08/02/2008, -0/+0I wonder why they don't just move the people in homes they can't
afford into less expensive homes that they can afford? There are
currently millions of vacant homes around. - mbuitron, on 09/26/2008, -0/+0Here's the letter I sent to my representatives:
I’m am writing to express my opposition to the seven hundred billion dollar bailout of Wall Street requested by Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke—a ginormous amount of taxpayer earned cash with no accountability, no transparency and no guarantees. I would expect no less from Mr. Paulson, the former head of Goldman Sachs. Though I don’t think his hundreds of millions in Goldman Sachs stocks is worth what it was when he left, it is plainly obvious where in personal interests lie.
It also seems unconscionable that the same over-leveraged corporations that got us into this mess are being rewarded with unrestricted funds. If the issue is having cash available so the financial system can buy and sell loans—exactly the root source of this over-leveraged mess we’re in now. If anything, these loans should go to the workers and wage earners that are now suffering the consequences of the financial markets’ greed and opportunism.
Over the course of my lifetime, I have watched the deterioration and neglect of America’s infrastructure and social programs designed to help the least fortunate among us. Now with this debacle Congress will be broke for years, and our educational ranking, health, energy dependence and environment will continue to suffer.
The corporations and organizations that fund reelection campaigns now have your ear. But the sea change that has taken place over the past couple of years will continue until us voters—the people who make things and provide services—will prevail over those the speculators and wealthy who now rewrite the rules they play by.
Since the Cheney-Bush presidency began, war in Iraq and then the Patriot Act has been railroaded through congress. Our founding fathers established a system of checks and balances. Section 8 of their proposal would remove the possibility for judicial oversight or administrative review. Use your powers to stop another White House-instigated quagmire.
I also posted it here:
http://imoralist.blogspot.com/2008/09/galbraith-sa ... - hiitsmescott, on 09/24/2008, -0/+0I’m sure you are smart enough to be pissed about this housing bailout crap rather than just doing the sheep to the slaughter thing that most of this country is doing. Dave and some others have put together a plan to keep us from eating this 700 billion worth of other peoples mistakes. The only way it is going to work though is if enough people email congressmen, senators, reps, and anybody else you can think of. It’ll only take a second to keep our grandchildren out of an ocean of debt not to mention it will be helping this country take a hard right away from socialism (cough cough obamaism cough). Don’t be lazy, take a second to do this. Not many people realize the implications of the housing bailout beyond the immediate economic views. The country won’t crash without this bailout, this plan can work but only if Congress truly believes that we’re going to take them down a notch if they don’t get on the ball.
You can read and hear about it here:
http://www.daveramsey.com/tdrs/index.cfm/2008/9/23 ...
Seriously, take a second to send an email, and forward this along. - OurCreation, on 09/21/2008, -0/+0To my elected representative,
Please STOP the lunacy that is the proposed $700 billion bailout of the financial industry. Make no mistake, this is not a bailout of the citizens you were elected to represent. This is a bailout of the corporations from whom you've accepted money and other support, using money you are taking from the citizens you were elected to represent...and from their children...and from their children.
The citizens you were elected to represent are substantially protected from major changes in the financial industry via FDIC, SIPC, and excess SIPC insurance on their bank and brokerage accounts. Only those citizens who freely chose to invest in financial companies will suffer investment losses, just as those did who freely chose to invest in technology companies before the dot com bust. That's the way it should be.
The financial companies in trouble are the ones who freely chose to make bad decisions about what they invested in, and about how they managed risk and cash flows. They deserve to fail so that a new generation of financial companies which are better managed can flourish, making it much less likely that the current situation will ever repeat. The financial companies in trouble do not deserve to be gifted, or even "loaned," taxpayer money so that they can continue their past mistakes. If they are able to avoid failing by changing quickly into a next-generation financial company WITHOUT a taxpayer-funded bailout, then they have proven they deserve to survive. Whether new or re-born, we need better managed next-generation financial companies in our economy.
You are free to use the arguments made here to publicly justify your vote against the proposed $700 billion bailout.
I am asking you to vote AGAINST the proposed $700 billion bailout, in any form. I will record which of my representatives vote FOR the bailout, and will vote AGAINST them and their parties in the November election. I am also urging my friends, colleagues, and community to do the same.
Warm regards,
David - jasonjanus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Let 'em fry...
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is