Yeah, but wouldn't it be great if they paid your mortgage?
Posted By: Shirley U. Jest on 2009-03-03
In Reply to: Commodities........... sm - m
Apparently, you have no problem with charity if it begins at "home."
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
BT, I am sooo with you, we also finally paid the mortgage, the cars are ours....sm
and no more credit, bad debts and loans killed the economy and Wall Street. Just providing for our 3 kids and making ends meet is the daily challenge, but we have each other and a good extended family, I so hope that the good thing that comes out of this crisis is LESS MATERIALISM in this country, back to simpler living and being happy with less!
maybe if you would have paid better, you wouldn't have had to scrape the bottom of the barrel -nm
:)
Yeah, I forgot, he never paid
*No child left behind* either....remember that...Yeah, silly me, he would never do that. My sincere apologies....javascript:editor_insertHTML('text',' ');
javascript:editor_insertHTML('text','');
Wouldn't it be great.......
to have all these wonderful things -- healthcare, food, clothing, housing, heat/air, transportation, all without paying for it. FREE is great! Now, how do you pay for it?
yeah right, their sure doing a great job of it as we keep seeing more and more
layoffs as the days go on, more and more people losing homes. It's getting worse and worse and worse an the dems do have control over it. If the dems were so great we'd be hearing of even a fraction of improvement but there is none. Its worse and worse and worse. You can blame whatever you want on Bush and those mean ol nasty republicans, however, you can't blame the stock market on him. He's been gone for a month now and the stock market is reacting to our wonderful leader preaching his doom and gloom. Nobody has confidence anymore in anyone that is in Washington.
As far as I'm concerned they can have it all. But if they're going to take it they better take responsibilities for the mistakes they are making.
Yeah, that's a great idea....(sm)
We could lower ourselves to their standards and become just like them. How awesome would that be? Just think, with actions like that we might even get that Crusade you guys have been pushing for.
Note: Doing the same thing that terrorists do makes us just like them. Just because we do it out of revenge or in a different name, does not make us any better than them. Jihad...Crusade...both believe they are right, so you tell me the difference.
Yeah, isn't Obama the great example for us to
nm
Yeah, and I hear you can get a great deal on real
estate when you chum up with Tony Rezko, too.
Great post, great insight, great analysis, thanks!..nm
nm
Why should we pay your mortgage?
Why on earth should the people who were smart enough not to jump on the bandwagon and buy a bigger house than they could afford give a 30% mortgage decrease to the people who went hog wild and spent above their means? I am not a homeowner, by choice, and I am totally against giving anyone a decrease on a mortgage that they agreed upon when they purchased their home. You make a mistake, you pay the consequences!
Mortgage
Somebody who cannot afford to buy a house should not buy a house, bedasue they do not want to lose out on the rent money.
There are people out there who buy a house, rent it out and expect the tenants to pay the mortgage. If something goes wrong, who pays the mortgage then?
Wrong speculations!
about that fixing your mortgage --
are they going to go back and fix everybody's mortgage that has already had their house foreclosed?
DH and I should get our mortgage fixed....
we have no debt but our home, have never missed a payment or been late, pay a few hundred dollars extra every month towards the principal, have never taken out a HELOC or used our equity (quite a bit) for anything and have a fantastic credit score. We should have our rate lowered below the 5% it is now for doing a great job. But no, we'll give a break to those who bought too much house, had to compete with the Jones' and who took out foolish loans to begin with.
The Mortgage Failure......
Check out the mortgage failures.
Tell me which failed more, prime or subprime
Tell me what is the rate of failures under the CRA or even Bush's ADDI (which i attack alll the time)
Once again, REALITY AND THE DATA doesn't fit ya'lls claims.
Basically what happened was.. we reformed bankruptcy laws.. so that people who ran into dire straights could not restructure.
We packaged the loans into commodity derivatives. These are sorta mirror bets on the loans. Sorta..as the same loan will be sold many times in many derivative packages.. that's why the housing derivatives are worth more than all the real estate in the US. Derivatives are actually not that bad.. when a market is stable and only has to deal with natural forces. The housing market was bubbled.. partially due to low interest rates that encouraged everyone to buy, even the rich, and partially due to the CRA and the ADDI.. which did add customers to the market (helping form the bubble was the extent the CRA and the ADDI had in this mess)
All it took was a few failures to pop the bubble..and make real estate prices drop,. and mind you, it was mainly prime loans (READ not loans given to poor people and not loans under the CRA) that failed. The derivative market.,.which like I said, is really mirrors of the same loans.. cause the defaults to explode with ten times the ferocity, because one loan could effect the price of dozens of derivatives.
Really the poor and even irresponsible people .. simply did not have the economic ability to cause this mess. Pool all their money together and waste it on hookers.. it would have zero effect without help from the rich elites and their magnifying packaged derivatives.
THE CRA and ADDI both had stricter requirements than loans you got from normal banks.. both required income data.. where many prime loans did not.. they also greatly limited you on how much home you could purchase..whereas private banks did not care if you tried to buy something you could not afford.
Don't believe me?.. Look in the phone book.. call your own housing authority - you can get a loan for 106% the purchase price of a home even today.. if you're poor enough.
Ask to hear the red tape and hoops you must go through.. Heck, it is probably easier to just get a real job and earn real money than go through the FHA.
I don't think we should bail out anyone's mortgage.
Anyone who took out a mortgage and signed a contract to repay the loan and needs to do so. I don't care if they are illegal aliens, legal aliens, space aliens, or United States citizens.
That's how the mortgage cookie crumbles!
I am still against bailing out homeowners only!
the whole mortgage thing upsets me...sm
I have a subprime mortage and have had for over 3-1/2 years, but I make my payments on time every month. I can't even get a refinance to go through with almost $40,000 in equity in the house and only needing a loan for $85,500, as I put down a big down payment when I bought the house, but if I had an ARM or was in foreclosure there are programs that would put me in a new mortgage. So, here I am trying to take care of my bills, be a productive citizen, and I get no help. Makes lots of sense don't it.
McCain's mortgage plan
Did anybody understand when McCain brought up plan to buy bad mortgages and renegotiate, etc. Would that be with the $700 billion we are already shelling out or would this be an additional $300 Billion the taxpayers have to pay. If I can get my mortgage renegotiated with the government, maybe I'll just stop paying my mortgage and get something out of this after all!
Citi is my mortgage holder too. sm
They are just downright nasty when you call, can never post things on time, and then have the nerve to call and ask me when I am going to send my check when I have my bank statement in front of me saying they processed the check 3 days before they called me.
I am with you...LET THEM ALL TANK. Why should I give ANYBODY more of my hard earned money. And that includes Obama and his "redistribution of the wealth" schtick.
Disagree. Mortgage lenders FM/FM
and sub-prime mortgages did it, along with all the money certain senate leaders got for sticking up for for FM/FM. It's called GREED.
Dear Crabby, about the mortgage
Yes, American people were also greedy, but there were predatory lenders who got higher commissions for giving out those certain types of ARM mortgages. Do you know what an ARM is? Even if people qualified for conventional mortgages, the mortgage brokers didn't offer them because there was more money in it commission-wise for them if they brokered the ARM loans. We can thank Bush and the repubs because they did not want to regulate any of this.
You really should educate yourself.
Fugget about Uncle Tom's Cabin. Is that your claim to fame? aww shucks.
I have my mortgage throught CitiCorp.....
I wonder if I will see any of that largesse....NOT. Guess you have to be on the letter head. Oh well....LOL
No need to wonder...current mortgage bank crisis...
brought to you courtesy of greedy democrats on Congress and greedy Democrats at the top of Fannie Mae. The handwriting is on the wall. This one's on you. McCain saw it coming in 2005 and the dems shut him down. Well, we are reaping what they sowed. To quote Toby Keith...how do you like them now?
Rush just said the same thing....give everyone with a mortgage...sm
something like $75,000 to pay down their mortgage.
Do you agree with him also?
Yes, slimy mortgage companies who have no oversight....they don't ask anything
just selling 'em as fast they could and packed them all up into nice little derivatives to drive up the bubble and make fast money - at our expense.
You don't mind paying for an illegal mortgage?
nm
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You've said before that you're leaving, but you and your goons can't sta
If the current mortgage securities plan prevails,
come out of it all smelling like a rose. They are proposing to refinance the mortgages based on inflated appraised values that existed BEFORE the mortgage crisis, not the current lower values. In this way, the homeowners will still end up owing more on their mortgages than their homes are actually worth....they will just be paying for it for a longer term with more accumulated interest on the loan. Those terms are the ones we need to keep our eyes on and see how it plays out, but it looks to me like it is not going to make it into the next session of Congress.
I'd be happy if they just reduced everybody's mortgage rate to a fixed 3%. sm
Then everyone is still responsible for the debt they took on, yet they're still getting a break. It would free up a couple hundred bucks a month for me, which I could then use elsewhere to stimulate the economy. Fewer foreclosures, banks are still getting their money.
Wrong. Democrats are responsible for the mortgage meltdown, not Bush....
McCain tried to tell them in 2005...Dems blocked the regulation he begged for for Fannie/Freddie. But the Dems were too deep in the pockets...Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, James Johnson, Timothy Howard...all democrats, all walked away from fannie Mae with golden parachutes of millions...and we are left holding the bag. Fannie contributed more to Chris Dodd, Democratic head of Banking and COmmerce committe than any other senator in the past 20 years...followed closely by Barack Obama, who has only been IN the senate for 2 years...you do the math and follow the money. Democrats largely responsible for this. ANd you want to put one in the white house. Who wants to raise taxes in this financial crisis. What part of collapse of the economy don't you...and Mr. Obama...understand?
McCain has fogotten the stock market crash, mortgage/credit crisis,
unemployment rates, job losses, stagnant wages, rising prices in gas, food, health care, etc, etc, etc.
yeah, yeah, yeah.....what he failed to mention...
is that the Dems are responsible for the mortgage meltdown which is responsible for the wall street meltdown. Chris Dodd, Barney Frank...totally to blame. Blocked every attemmpt by Bush Admin and yes, McCain, to regulate fannie/freddie. Dems certainly have selective memories...convenient bouts of amnesia. lol.
That's right. He was paid but he
drove a used car and made about 10K a year. Apparently, he didn't do it for the money, so what's your point?
And those that do less, get paid less....
xx
And you really think HE paid for them?
Hate to break it to you hun, but in the end, we still paid for them. He works in the GOVERNMENT. Meaning he is paid with TAX dollars. OUR tax dollars.
They are running a campaign. Obviously, image is everything. Otherwise you all wouldn't be hating on the fact that John is an old man or that Sarah is a beauty pageant winner.
I'm so glad this is an important issue. If you want something donated to charity, contact O and tell him to sell his jet and give the money to hungry children.
Sheesh.
You PAID them? Gee, let's put you in DC
nm
Great, great post. Thank you, Marmann! nm
x
No stress here. If anyone is getting paid here...
it would seem to be the dem attack machine. thanks for your concern tho.
She paid for the tanning bed herself...
not the taxpayers. Maybe we should go in all the gov mansions in the lower 48 and see who installed what. Sheesh! lol.
As to the rape kit thing...you act as if Wasilla, Alaska is the only city who did that. It is common practice in the lower 48 as well. That does not make it right, but it is not isolated to Sarah Palin. And it you look closer, the Wasilla Police Department AND the State police (not under her jurisdiction) were actually paying for the testing, and then passing the cost on to the patient, which prompted the STATE, because of the state troopers billing as well, to ban the practice. So if you are going to take Wasilla to task for it, add several towns in the lower 48 to the list.
Yes, and the devil will be paid. n/m
It's not about what she wears. It's about who paid
of the populist appeals to the no frills, no elites allowed "working folks" who they are trying to dupe into believing they give a rat's butt about. If they are so cavalier with their campaign contributions, no telling what they would be willing to do if they ever got their hands on taxpayer money.
I am not b*tching about how little MTs are paid....
and we the people DO pay for union contracts with higher prices on goods. Union dues DO NOT pay for their benefits. Employers DO, who pass that on to consumers. I know you know that.
You don't have to tell me about Sam. I grew up in Sam country. I know a few blue haired ladies who started in the first store built in my little town who are rich today because of the profit sharing.
Yes, I shop at Wal-Mart. As do many millions of Americans. And not all their products are cheap knock-offs.
Oh I see...doesn't matter who someone associates with or what he does, or what a union does illegal or not, as long as it benefits the union members. I can see why Obama is not a concern to you.
Wonder how much Google is getting paid
Now that Google is tracking your search of symptoms put in by those who think they might have flu, they will send that info to the government and let them know where flu outbreaks may be? Now, of course, there will be those that think that is wonderful but those of us who do understand our privacy should be a freedom in this country, we know this is an out and out invasion of our privacy. Google has no privacy safeguards in place, so if Google is giving the government information on things we google, as they already have, you still think your government is wonderful and looking out for you? Google should be ashamed.......they are selling us out. There will be more and more companies invading our privacy as the government invades more of our private lives and these companies do their bidding.......
It probably will not be paid back.
Besides, we already owe China and now more? We still need to pay back the first debt. Looks like United States will be sold soon.
I think that if you truly paid attention
to the complaints on this board, you would realize that what we are complaining about is not the fact that our money is going to government programs to help people who need it. Most of us are upset because these government programs are being abused and misused by dishonest people who would much rather not work and be lazy just to receive government assistance. I have no problem helping people who need it. I think Clinton did a good thing by reforming welfare and I think it is a shame that Obama is undoing that. Welfare is supposed to be a hand up.....not a hand out.
Not wanting to help people in need is not the issue here and I wish that you guys could understand that. We aren't being heartless here. We are just sick and tired of people mooching off of the government when they could work and make a living for themselves.
If the dishonest people who are abusing the system could be taken out of the welfare equation, just think of the extra money we would have to really help those in need. Think about it.
Maybe if they ALL paid their taxes....
instead of hiding money in their freezers, offshore accounts and various tax shelters.......THEY ARE ALL GUILTY IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
It is probably not an MT and a paid blogger. sm
They are on all the political boards. The first hint was CV. You brought up some topics that are a no-no. I know it is hard, but try to ignore and not respond to posts attacking you. People need to question. I hope people do their research and there is some discussion on these topics. It is crucial that everyone understand the monetary system.
He was paid, the firm wasn't. SM
Either way, he could have said no and he didn't. Mind you, I have a limitation on what I think gay rights should extend to, but I won't go into that here because I will get slaughtered.
He paid with his own earnings? Oh how awful.
And what was your point? Wouldn't you tend to trust a candidate more who paid for his campaign with his own money, rather than taking bribes from special interests that he has to pay back later by stealing more freedom and cash from you?
And if your point was that his take on the case was so high that he could finance a whole campaign with it, again, so? - A jury of your peers made that award and likely you would have too had you been on the jury and had a chance to hear the facts. If he had been representing you in a case in which your child was disemboweled by a defective piece of equipment which the manufacturers knew full well tended to disembowel children but they sold it to you anyway, would you think the jury awarded too much or the lawyer might get paid too much?
Or instead of actually thinking about the need to have lawyers represent people who have been egregiously harmed by incompetent and negligent companies, and the need to have juries hear the facts and make appropriate awards when justified, is it just easier to nod at the bullcrap propaganda which says you don't NEED to be protected because look how much money the lawyer makes?
When it's your turn you're going to want that lawyer and you're going to want that jury to hear your story. So what is the problem you have with holding villains accountable and seeing other people get the settlements they deserve?
again...as usual...paid no attention...
The taking one more shot post appeared LONG before your cease fire....you just had not seen it yet. But it would not have mattered. I didn't read this latest diatribe...too tired and really don't give a darn. And I will give you a clue dear, one of those 4-letter words...I did not say the GOP then does not resemble the GOP now....in fact I agree whole-heartedly. The GOP has turned into Democrat lite. Which is why I don't belong to the grand old party anymore. Only register as Repub in primary years because if I didn't, I couldn't vote, and I want to have a say, no matter how small. You should really ask questions before you jump off the deep end...but you don't care, because you are always right, aren't you? Speaking from that high horse of moral authority. You must have the word "bigot" in your shortcuts, you sure invoke it enough. LOL. Really too bad that just you typing it here doesn't make it true....or maybe it is, the gospel according to Globetrotter....LOL geezzz.
If we were being paid bloated wages, maybe, but
if they want to go any lower than they already have gone (I had a truly insulting offer a few weeks back of 0.0625 cpl with 30 years experience), I say let India have it. MTSOs need to be going in the opposite direction and MTs might want to look into unionization themselves. Peronally, I think we are also worth $28/hr and do not consider that to be an exorbitant for MTs or for auto workers, given the COL. JMHO.
|
