Obama's redistribution of wealth

You are so right. The mortgage companies and uninformed consumers had nothing to do with the home foreclosures. It is Bushes fault nimrods who make 40K per year were talked into purchasing a $400K house with a 1% APR that went up to 8-10% later. People did not do their homework and got burnt. When my wife and I were shopping for a house in 2005, they were trying to talk us into a $300-400K place. When I told them I did not want to spend that much they told me, "Don't worry about interest rates going up, you will probably make more money in the future". Was Bush behind that line?

 

An end to the Iraq War will ensure plenty of cash available for "the social engineering programs." Nationalize the oil companies since they are subsidized so heavily by the tax payers anyway and let the cash flow into paying down the national debt and funding the social programs that work. There are a lot of social programs that are utter failures and need to be scrapped as well. The latter applies equally to Canada as to the United States of America.

Hopefully, alternative energy sources will be given higher priority and reduction of oil use by 90% might be achievable. With Chrysler, Ford, and GM all laying off workers in North America the automobile might be on its way out anyway. On a related note, I watched a documentary the other evening on PBS about how quickly the planet would recover if humans simply disappeared - the time from human footprint on the planet to completely erased as astonishingly small.

 

If you can't handle the intense heat, step aside and get out the Kitchen.

Randell1234,

I respect most of the things that you state on this forum, but the bottom line is that it was allowed to happened on his WATCH (8 years worth). The buck needs to stop being passed, because he is ultimately RESPONSIBLE.

Who should have been the one to make an attempt to stop predatory lenders from praying on everyday uninformed consumers? The same guy that wanted to stop the Iraqi people from being treated unfairly.

Why didn't our leader bail out these uninformed consumers when they started losing their homes?. I forgot he was worried about bailing out his corporate buddies failed ventures and making as much money as he and his cronies could with high oil prices. Let’s not forget he made it easier for big businesses to hide behind Bankruptcy when things do not go their way, but made it tougher for the average American like "Joe the Plummer" to seek debt relief and pay his property taxes. All of this happened again under his WATCH.

It's sad, when a corporation decides to report to its employees it's not making anticipated PROFITS and the first thing that corporation does is lay off workers and throw the possibility of BANKRUPTCY into play.

When I bought my first house I sold it first before upgrading to a new one. Once I sold the house I took a majority of the profits from the sale and paid 50% down on my new $300K home. How was I able to do this? I bought a fixer upper and worked nights and weekends fixing it up, not to mention I spent every dime I could muster up, worked 60 to 80 hours per week. No one gave me anything, but let’s not forget that all or most of us on this forum are constantly seeking new and improved ways of bettering ourselves and making our future retirements more ENJOYABLE.

Yet, some public skeptics expect Obama to start NOW before his term starts and to come up with new strategies and start working on fixing the terrible mess the guy before him has made. Obama was correct when he stated in his first interview as President-elect that " you can have only one President at a time and I can do nothing for 70 some days". Let the current President worry about digging us out of the mess that has HAPPENED ON HIS WATCH and let him stop worrying about returning to Texas for retirement in a couple of months.

Enough said, we will see what OUR current President does in the next 70 something days to ease the economic crisis on my fellow Americans. The automotive industry (GM, Chrysler and Ford) employees and their families are watching closely.

 

Well, Obama has already stated he wants to bankrupt the coal industry, so I guess we can scratch that alternative source off the list.

No, he's not.

One of the reasons I'm a proud conservative is because I believe in the concept of personal responsibility. As Randell stated, the POTUS (whoever it may be) has nothing to do with morons who can't do simple addition and subtraction when purchasing a home. It's not George W. Bush's fault that people who were making barely above minimum wage bought houses that I couldn't possibly afford.

 

Let us climb from behind the rock please.

Come on Bruce, your conservative buddies have been bending the American consumer over for 8 straight years. Give Obama a chance to Bankrupt the government and bend us over too. Ok, the conservative party has not only bankrupt the USA, but they are now ready to hide behind their conservative ROCKS and leave the American tax payer/new incoming administration to REPAY bad debt built on a flat out series of conservative lies. But the conservatives have to blame someone for their SHORT COMINGS.

Poor Gov. Palin is getting it good from her fellow conservatives now that the election is over.

Your conservative opinion is welcomed, but as a former 100% conservative turned mutt (50% liberal/50% conservative) you guys are still passing the buck.
Please remember one of our educated fellows a loan officer allowed that loan ("for those people who were making barely above minimum wage to buy houses that they couldn't afford") to be APPROVED based on their wages at that time. Sounds like UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR to me.

 

My dear jek. W and his cronies had absolutely nothing to do with the bad times this country is experiencing. I guess that is why a Dem got elected by a landslide?


Abner

 

Let's try to solve the economic problems together.

Bruce,

PLEASE GET OFF YOUR CONSERVATIVE HIGH HORSE, I WOULD HATE FOR YOU TO HIT YOUR CONSERVATIVE HARD HEAD AND FALL AND SOME LIBERAL HAS TO COME ALONG AND HELP YOU GET BACK UP.

 

Yes Abner,


I almost forgot the Dems did win the election by a LANDSLIDE over the Reps didn't they

The Republicans have to blame someone for their SHORT COMINGS.

 

George W. Bush is no more a true conservative than you are.

She's being back-stabbed by McCain's people, who's even less a conservative than Bush.

What in the world does a bank loan officer have to do with the President of the United States?

You have it backwards; conservatives get up on their own. Liberals always look for the handout....I mean hand up.

 

Did you forget already your previous quote "One of the reasons I'm a proud conservative is because I believe in the concept of personal responsibility. As Randell stated, the POTUS (whoever it may be) has nothing to do with morons who can't do simple addition and subtraction when purchasing a home. It's not George W. Bush's fault that people who were making barely above minimum wage bought houses that I couldn't possibly afford", you brought it up and you have forgotten it already.

That is why I made the statement, "Please remember one of our educated fellows a loan officer allowed that loan to be APPROVED based on their wages at that time."

I guess that's why the corporate bailout was introduced (needed and handout, oops I meant hand up) and the conservatives are now scrabbling to find new jobs before Jan 2009.

I leave the post on a good note, the Democrates WON the election by a landslide. ENOUGH SAID

 

So your blaming this thing on the people who cannot afford it instead of the gatekeepers? You cannot coming and play unless the gatekeepers lets you in. This is what is known as responsible lending or practices and the gatekeepers did not play by the rules. Lets repeat, you do not lend money to people who cannot pay you back or take extremely High risk in lending this money.

Now they are doing what they were supposed to do before the mess. I cannot blame one person, but a bunch of them to include those who voted for the ones responsible for this mess. But to be clear, deregulation ( it is good if exercise responsibly) is to blame (my observation). Too late to point fingers, now what is left is to fix it.

 

No offense, but this is usually only spoken by someone who doesn't know the full tax burden that "rich" people pay.

Here's a use case:

The average tax burden for an American family making $75K in local, state and federal taxes was 9.2% in 2004, or a bit less than $7K.

Let's assume that this hypothetical family lives in a midwest state like Nebraska, or Iowa, or even Indiana.

Someone making $250K and subject to the AMT (like many are) and living in a high tax state like NY are paying in the realm of $90K in taxes. Yes, you heard right.

"So what" you say, the $75K family still only has $68K. The $250K family has a ton of money - $160K.

Then let's say that the $75K family has a nice house that's worth $150,000, and pays around $1,000 a month in mortgage payments, plus $1,000 a year in property taxes. That should leave them around $58K (assuming they itemize) after their housing commitments.

Then, the New York family buys a house that costs $600,000, pays $4,000 a month in mortgage payments and pays $15K a year in property taxes (neither of which are exorbitant for any area on Long Island with a decent school district). That now leaves them around $107K.

So the gap originally was $175,000, but after taxes and housing, it's now $49,000. Also, if the $250K family needs to pay child care because both parents choose to work it's now around $37,000. In my case, I have two kids, so that gap is now only $25K. Sure, it's a lot more than nothing but that's where the "rich" theory goes out the window.

THAT's why I think about taxes.

 

President-elect Obama received 52% of the popular vote. He won the electoral college vote by a landslide, yes.

If Congress chooses to forget about the other 48% when they create their policies they will have an unpleasant surprise in 2010 during the mid-term elections. It happened before in 1978 and 1994, so there is precedence.

 

The blame should be equally spread. Any idiot should know that they can't afford a $1M home on a $75K income yet there were HGTV shows a couple of years ago saying that people were doing exactly that with interest-only mortgages.

Lenders who tricked or cheated people should be investigated and sent to jail, but I have a word for those who were just plain stupid and lost their home because they didn't read the potential liability they would be under if their mortgage re-adjusted beyond what they could afford:

"RENTERS"

 

The term renters apply to house owners too, because you are renting the space of that house to the local government you live, if you don't pay your taxes you are of a house. Now the ugly, that many people call themselves homeowners, if you still owe to the bank, you are not the owner, the bank is, only 300 more monthly payments and the house is mine as long as pay my local taxes.

 

Sadly, those folks would have been better off as renters.

 

The purpose of a public corporation is to ensure shareholder value. Period. Otherwise why would people invest in it?

If a public company falls short in profits it needs to reduce costs. Ideally, this should be across the board and also reduce executive compensation, but regardless of the method it needs to curb spending in order to keep the stock price high and shareholders happy.

If people feel uncomfortable with this they should make sure they never work for a public company.

 

Once again, what does that have to do with the President of the United States?

I was vehemently opposed to the bailout, and have you forgotten that it was passed by a Democrat-majority Congress?

I wouldn't call 52% of the popular vote anything close to a landslide. In any case, I'm actually looking forward to the next 2 years. With a Democrat President and a solidly Democrat Congress, there are positively no excuses anymore from the Democrats when things start turning to crap.

And, they will.

 

Well, I respect that we all have opinions and each is entitled to his or her own. I hope and pray I am wrong because I wish nothing but the best for all deserving people.

 

No, he's a neocon in power, which is way worse. As a neocon, he and his cronies have gone against almost every consertative principle. Massive deficit spending, foreign adventures (including an untterly purposeless war), unprecedented intrusion into the privacy of everyday Americans, torture, abandoning the rule of law, you pick it. The only thing "conservative" about him is his religious beliefs and his willingness to give both voice and power to those who would leverage their version of religion into everyone else's lives.

No, George W. Bush is not a conservative. He's far worse.

As for taxes, who cares if the tax margins move one way or another? That will have little impact on our lives and the economy. But watch Obama undo the worst Bush had to offer. Americans may actually get to be Americans again. And those that wave the flag while clearly hating all it represents? They're going home. Hopefully, for generations to come.

Let freedom reign.