B_jacknapier
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Posts
- 672
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 3
- Points
- 103
- Location
- Pittsburgh
- Sexuality
- 80% Straight, 20% Gay
Congrats, sargon! 1,111 posts!!! that's cool
If the entire US government with it's VAST resources can get a war wrong can't an individual get a loan wrong?
If the entire US government with it's VAST resources can get a war wrong can't an individual get a loan wrong?
If you think back, it was Bill Clinton who wanted every american to have a home of their own if they desired one. After Clinton was out of office, Congressman Barney Frank spoke out and said it wasn't responsible. There are people who shouldn't own their own home, and they aren't entitled. Why'd he wait so long to speak out?
b. I Somewhat Agree.
The situation evokes Big Tobacco. Certainly the smokers are not coerced into buying cigarettes at gunpoint...The demand side may be as guilty as the supply side...
However, Big Tobacco indeed profits while smokers indeed lose.
The same holds true for predatory lending.
My father died of lung cancer two years ago. He lit up the moment we walked out of the oncologists office when he told us the diagnosis.
Not for one minute have I blamed the tobacco companies. I used to use tobacco in various forms, I quit. I can't help but shake my head when people blame big business for their woes.
Like I said, it's much easier to blame someone else, because it's impossible for people to just be stupid so someone has to be to blame right?.....nah, I'm going to stick with stupid.
People cry for more government because they refuse to stand up and take action themselves. Luby's Cafeterias were being mishandled and the CEO had a large compensation package. A group of investors started an online campaign to oust him and the board. It became such a problem for the corporation that they had to restructure how they were operating, and become more fiscally responsible.
I believe in Rotten Kapitalism without the Rot.
The excesses of the not-so-free "market" economy (do you actually believe failing CEO's $200m golden parachutes are set by rational market forces?) have swayed the public mood to the opposite ideological extreme, I am afraid...
It is because of the high-profile obscenities of a few deviant capitalists that the general public has lost faith in the economic model that made us so successful. Hence the cry for more government.
The tax cuts are an illusion. Without cutting spending they just CHARGED the tax cut to the future. RED INK It's the hallmark of this administration. He took a surplus and turned it into years and years of RED ink.
Then tell me WHY the heads of all the banks and investment firms that were on the deck when this happened all were fired?
Getting a loan ought to be hard. The BANK is taking the risk of losses NOT the borrower. Banks were offering up loans to people with NO DOCUMENTATION required. And why? GREED GREED GREED. The banks even KNEW these people were bad risks hence the term SUB-PRIME LOANS.
A) This is not the first time the country has had a national debt and the current national debt is no where near historic highs. You finance your car so you can get and forth to work and finance your home so you have a place to live, the government finances itself also = big deal.
B) The “surplus” = you mean the fuzzy math based on future projected revenue?
. Just because Ronald Reagan built an economy (starting with tax breaks and heavy spending) that allowed for heavy growth & these alleged surpluses during the Clinton years does not mean the economy can continue on an upswing for eternity. The economy runs in cycles now like it always has and will continue to do so.
The ”NO DOCUMENTATION” loans you are talking about are called SISA’s (stated income, stated assets). These loans were credit score driven and not easy to get.
A) This is not the first time the country has had a national debt and the current national debt is no where near historic highs. You finance your car so you can get and forth to work and finance your home so you have a place to live, the government finances itself also = big deal.
There's nothing FUZZY about the red ink of the Bush Administration. The projection AND the reality is red ink for as far as you can project. But don't let that reality intrude on your ideology. Reality has no place in that world.
On the contrary. The current national debt is higher than it has ever been historically:
Excerpt from:
Why the US has really gone broke, by Chalmers Johnson
Its not just that our tastes for foreign goods, including imported oil, vastly exceed our ability to pay for them. We are financing them through massive borrowing. On 7 November 2007, the US Treasury announced that the national debt had breached _$9 trillion for the first time. This was just five weeks after Congress raised the debt ceiling to $9.815 trillion. If you begin in 1789, at the moment the constitution became the supreme law of the land, the debt accumulated by the federal government did not top $1 trillion until 1981. When George Bush became president in January 2001, it stood at approximately $5.7 trillion. Since then, it has increased by 45%. This huge debt can be largely explained by our defense expenditures.
Are you missing the whole point? If a bank offers credit to an individual who ends up not being able to pay whose fault is it? Surely some fault goes with the borrower but the main party at fault is the lending institution. THEY took a risk and lost. They have to write down billions in loses.