Sure, blame the poor people when Bush was the real culprit
- Thread starter slurper_la
- Start date
So people shouldn't be responsible for their own money? Just let the banks and government tell us what to do with it? Sounds simple enough. As a people, we need to stop listening to our politicians and media and start using our own judgment again, hardly any of them have any business experience. Most were poli-sci, communications, and law majors, and are generally good for nothing except bullshitting
Don't get me wrong, we would never be in this mess if the push for low-income home ownership had actually been regulated. Fannie and Freddie should not have created so many risky mortgages, because in the end, they all had to be sold. Once they were sold, banks had to get rid of them; the longer they held them, the more they cost the banks. Once these loans were on the market, they flat out had to be sold, there was no going back. Yes, banks did probably take advantage of many unknowing people, but there were also tons of irresponsible people who didn't use proper judgment when making what is usually the biggest purchase of an individual's life.
...and now they're telling us we need to take out more loans to fix the problem. These people make absolutely no sense. I don't know about you, but I am not too happy about being a shareholder of companies who run a debt ratio of 30:1...now THAT is bullshit if I've ever seen it. Yes, us taxpayers in theory control the company, but we have no actual say as to what goes on...the only thing that has changed is the risk has now been spread out, passed on to us. I'm still wondering what makes our politicians think the assets they want to buy will someday have value. If anyone knows, clue me in
...and now they're telling us we need to take out more loans to fix the problem. These people make absolutely no sense. I don't know about you, but I am not too happy about being a shareholder of companies who run a debt ratio of 30:1...now THAT is bullshit if I've ever seen it. Yes, us taxpayers in theory control the company, but we have no actual say as to what goes on...the only thing that has changed is the risk has now been spread out, passed on to us. I'm still wondering what makes our politicians think the assets they want to buy will someday have value. If anyone knows, clue me in
faceking
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2004
- Posts
- 7,426
- Media
- 6
- Likes
- 282
- Points
- 208
- Location
- Mavs, NOR * CAL
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Actually the overall housing bubble was the main culprit, with some perfect storm contributors (low-income programs, gas/oil, global political upset, etc....).
The rich and powerful are NEVER to blame for anything otherwise the trickle-down philosophy that is the very underpinning of conservative ideology would collapse. If the people at the top don't know what they're doing then the peasants might rise up and we CAN'T have that. A democrat could get elected.
As such this democrat is trying to make the rich poor by limiting the rich beggars to $500k a year. And he is clueless if he thinks a CEO can live in NYC on $500k a year.
You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
As such this democrat is trying to make the rich poor by limiting the rich beggars to $500k a year. And he is clueless if he thinks a CEO can live in NYC on $500k a year.
You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
PRIVATE school: $32,000 a year per student.
Mortgage: $96,000 a year.
Co-op maintenance fee: $96,000 a year.
Nanny: $45,000 a year.
We are already at $269,000, and we haven’t even gotten to taxes yet.
Mortgage: $96,000 a year.
Co-op maintenance fee: $96,000 a year.
Nanny: $45,000 a year.
We are already at $269,000, and we haven’t even gotten to taxes yet.
No one is saying that the rich and powerful aren't to blame for their fair share of this recession, but by and LARGE, the rich and powerful are what makes this economy work.
Without the initiative and planning of the rich, poor people would be sitting around waiting for some government program to help them run their lives. (Actually, a lot of poor people do that already).
Thank God for rich people. Without them, many, many people would live far emptier and less productive lives than they already do.
AllHazzardi
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Posts
- 338
- Media
- 76
- Likes
- 18
- Points
- 163
- Location
- Palm Springs, California
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
What you really want to do to fix this situation is to appeal to the rich people to invest their money in things that help everyone. Rather than limit their money, instead remove the limit, and do what you can to help it grow. If you figure rich people, in their richness, control the purse strings. For the sake of argument, you figure rich people are people too, with their own desires and interpretations of what they want to do. Taking these two facts, you want to fix the system, you figure out how to get the money going from those who have it, to that which needs it, so that they will eventually profit from it.
You can say fuck the rich. You can say fuck the poor. You can say the rich fuck the poor.
But really in the end it's only a matter of talking to each other. Often in the middle of wars, two dire enemies end up helping each other because one of them had the presence of mind to ask for help and offer help. Two wounded soldiers surviving not because of being on the same side, or making the right choices, but because they took the moment to start to know each other, and they survive because of that. No rift is too great so as to be uncrossable.
AllHazzardi
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Posts
- 338
- Media
- 76
- Likes
- 18
- Points
- 163
- Location
- Palm Springs, California
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Of course, the question is, in what way are you relating it? As a failure of the statement, or as a success of it? The attackers ended up crossing the drawbridge and continuing the fight, I'd say they crossed a great rift. It is believed that the defenders let the door open to prevent a massacre, that's a really big act of attempted peace, a very large rift crossed, too bad they were misunderstood.
So, sorry for getting side-tracked... what's your reason for relating it?
transformer_99
Experimental Member
Well, that's NYC ? Enough said about that place. We had an entire thread on NYC, it started off with where the best pizza is made. It turned into a mud slinging affair and I threw as much mud on NYC as I could. There is nothing in NYC that is worth earning $ 500K/year and blowing it there in a given year. That's right, absolutely nothing in NYC that would make me want to earn $ 500K/year and have to put up with that lifestyle. Now the incomes those execs had prior to the bailouts ? You'd still have to weigh the health risks of NYC vs the payoff/payout you get. but I also have to figure if you're that high up in the food chain anyway, you can make what they get in NYC elsewhere and do better because the cost of living is better elsewhere ?
BTW, the original topic, let's not forget the property flippers that required the banks to create these type of products to sell to the lower income housing market ? If a house doesn't double, triple or quadruple in selling price, is there a need for such mortgages. It also lends to ask, under such inflation, is it a low income & affordable housing initiative any more ?
Ah yes, poor people are poor because they are lazy. If they were not, they'd be rich. BOOTSTRAPS! Social Darwinism!
The last person I saw backing this viewpoint on the board said he received no advantages and still ended up wealthy so anyone could do it. All he had handed to him from his parents was a top-tier education(free) and his first car(free). No handouts there!
Yep. Isn't that amazing. I had the silver spoon in my mouth growing up but I did it all on my own. OK. OK. Right.
Similar threads
