Bush Mortgage Action TOO Little TOO Late!

from JoeUser Forums


The help President Bush signed into law this week will help some 200,000 people with mortgages that are in trouble. Some argue that Tax Payers should not bail out the bad choices of individual home owners or the mortgage industry. If the consequences of these failures only impacted those who made the bad choices that rational would make sense.

The problem is that the magnitude of the mortgage failures could trigger a major recession and credit crises. That is why the fed and Bush have decided to act. Former Fed Chairman Greenspan believes the mortgage problem is a VERY serious issue and has supported actual direct funding from the federal Government to individuals to help them refinance their mortgages to avoid default.


To date about 3 million mortgages have defaulted and there are as many as another 2 million that are believed to be in danger of defaulting. The plan Bush provided only deals with 200,000 of the 5,000,000 mortgages that are part of this problem. That means Bush has provided help for about FOUR PER CENT of the problem! Does he believe that the possible recession and credit problem can be avoided by dealing with only 4% of the problem?

The action Bush and his administration took to solve major issues facing our country do not come close to fixing the problem at hand. It is just like the Bush plan to give tax credits so people without health insurance can afford to purchase private insurance. The estimate is that the Bush health plan would solve the issue for 3 of the 47 million who need health insurance. That is just over 6% of the health insurance problem. Why does take action Bush takes does not deal with the issue at hand? So Bush and his SPIN DOCTORS can make it look like he CARES!
politics
23,338 views 73 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
The federal government shouldn't be stepping in at all.
Former Fed Chairman Greenspan believes the mortgage problem is a VERY serious issue and has supported actual direct funding from the federal Government to individuals to help them refinance their mortgages to avoid default.
More welfare. What's next? Helping people pay.... Car payments Cable TV New gaming console Internet connection Where does it end? As you stated in your other thread, go get a second job and make your payments!
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Island DogPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007The federal government shouldn't be stepping in at all. Former Fed Chairman Greenspan believes the mortgage problem is a VERY serious issue and has supported actual direct funding from the federal Government to individuals to help them refinance their mortgages to avoid default.More welfare. What's next? Helping people pay.... Car payments Cable TV New gaming console Internet connection Where does it end? As you stated in your other thread, go get a second job and make your payments!


No this is NOT welfare. The issue that Greenspan brings up is that if we do not act, this could trigger a recession that will impact many people who DID MAKE the bad decisions about their mortgage and cost many times more then to act and help refinance these mortgages.

The proposal is NOT to pay the mortgages for these people but to pay the cost to refinance the mortgages so the individuals can afford to pay them rather then go into default. If for example we spent $5,000 per mortgage to help refinance 4 million mortgages the cost would be 20 Billion. If we have a Major recession the cost overall could be hundreds of billions and impact many who had no part in creating this problem.

People who use the "Its WELFARE" argument simply ignore the very real potential that ignoring this issue may cost us all a LOT more then to deal with the issue.
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
The issue that Greenspan brings up is that if we do not act, this could trigger a recession that will impact many people who DID MAKE the bad decisions about their mortgage and cost many times more then to act and help refinance these mortgages.
End of quote


The only people using the recession word are liberals and the media. 

Of course this is welfare....the government paying your mortgage payment because you made an irresponsible choice.  And this is something people are proposing.


If for example we spent $5,000 per mortgage to help refinance 4 million mortgages the cost would be 20 Billion.
End of quote


LOL.  Let me guess gene, the rich should pay for this, right?
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yeah, this is welfare. I'm all for helping people, but this is far too much.

Talk about throwing a monkey wrench into the works. This is going to do far more harm than any good, Gene. How you can't see that (nor President Bush, for that matter) simply proves to me you're both moronic when it comes to the economy.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Island DogPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
The issue that Greenspan brings up is that if we do not act, this could trigger a recession that will impact many people who DID MAKE the bad decisions about their mortgage and cost many times more then to act and help refinance these mortgages.
The only people using the recession word are liberals and the media.


WRONG - Greenspan said there was a 50% chance of a RECESSION!


. Let me guess gene, the rich should pay for this, right?



Those who can afford to pay should pay!
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: SanChoninoPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007Yeah, this is welfare. I'm all for helping people, but this is far too much.Talk about throwing a monkey wrench into the works. This is going to do far more harm than any good, Gene. How you can't see that (nor President Bush, for that matter) simply proves to me you're both moronic when it comes to the economy.


Tell that to Greenspan! I would take his advice over ANYONE on this Blog Site!!!!!!!!!
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Those who can afford to pay should pay!
End of quote


then you should be the first to start paying.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Another cut&paste bit of blather from the DNC's favorite JU blogger.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Tell that to Greenspan! I would take his advice over ANYONE on this Blog Site!!!!!!!!!
End of quote


Normally I would agree with Greenspan, but even legends like him make mistakes sometimes.

And this would be one.



PS Could you cut down on the bold? Makes it seem like you're yelling at everyone, and makes you kinda seem like a douche. :NOTSURE:
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Those who can afford to pay should pay!
then you should be the first to start paying.


Just as soon as I am in the top 10% I will be happy to pay more!


Reply By: DaiwaPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007Another cut&paste bit of blather from the DNC's favorite JU blogger.



WHEN did Greenspan become a member of the DNC?

Reply By: SanChoninoPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Tell that to Greenspan! I would take his advice over ANYONE on this Blog Site!!!!!!!!!
Normally I would agree with Greenspan, but even legends like him make mistakes sometimes.And this would be one.




I will continue to accept his advice over anyone on this Blog Site until that can show they have a better understanding of the financial operations of this country!
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Those who can afford to pay should pay!
then you should be the first to start paying.


Just as soon as I am in the top 10% I will be happy to pay more!
End of quote




your first statement did not say anything about being in the top 10%. so since you can afford to pay then you should pay.

as the saying goes what is good for the goose is good for the gander.


you can not expect anyone to listen to you unless you are willing to put up.

put up or shut up
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: DaiwaPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007Another cut&paste bit of blather from the DNC's favorite JU blogger.
End of quote


you stupid
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Those who can afford to pay should pay!
End of quote


And you claim not be a socialist.  One class of people should directly pay for the mistakes of another.  Unbeleivable.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Those who can afford to pay should pay! then you should be the first to start paying.Just as soon as I am in the top 10% I will be happy to pay more!
your first statement did not say anything about being in the top 10%. so since you can afford to pay then you should pay.


Better go back and look what I have written. I have always said we should increase the tax burden on the top 10%. They are the people that got most of the Bush Tax Cuts!

Reply By: Island DogPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Those who can afford to pay should pay!
And you claim not be a socialist. One class of people should directly pay for the mistakes of another. Unbeleivable.


If the economy were to go into a recession because of the Mortgage problem the wealthy will pay as well. They can look at it as an investment to keep the economy positive!
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Are individuals ever responsible for their own actions in your world, Gene?
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
Again, Gene, kill the bold. It makes you look even less intelligent because you rely on such petty tactics to get your point across.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Better go back and look what I have written. I have always said we should increase the tax burden on the top 10%. They are the people that got most of the Bush Tax Cuts!
End of quote




fine then i am just using your philosophy you have more than me so you should pay me.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
because you rely on such petty tactics to get your point across.
End of quote


what point
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: DraginolPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007Are individuals ever responsible for their own actions in your world, Gene?


Yes however that is not the issue. Is it better to prevent a mortgage created recession by helping millions of people to refinance their mortgages or accept what could be far more harmful situation by doing nothing? Greenspan believes we would be better to prevent the massive foreclosures and I agree with him. It is like putting a small fire out or let it burn and cause far more damage.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Better go back and look what I have written. I have always said we should increase the tax burden on the top 10%. They are the people that got most of the Bush Tax Cuts!
fine then i am just using your philosophy you have more than me so you should pay me.


I do not know what you have but I know I did not receive much from the Bush Tax cuts so I have nothing to give back!
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
do not know what you have but I know I did not receive much from the Bush Tax cuts so I have nothing to give back!
End of quote


you sir are a bigot.

your anti rich.

that makes you a bigot.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top

Yes however that is not the issue. Is it better to prevent a mortgage created recession by helping millions of people to refinance their mortgages or accept what could be far more harmful situation by doing nothing?
End of quote

So how much are you willing to donate?  Why should my family sacrifice to bail other people out of their own greed and poor decisions?

Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top

I do not know what you have but I know I did not receive much from the Bush Tax cuts so I have nothing to give back!
End of quote

Then you must not pay very much in taxes. It doesn't surprise me that you're not well off given your views on economics (such as the one where you say that when you spend too much you should just look for a higher paying job or get another job).

The path to wealth isn't through consumption. It is through investing.  Those who spend more than they make often end up begging for help in the end.

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
do not know what you have but I know I did not receive much from the Bush Tax cuts so I have nothing to give back!
you sir are a bigot.your anti rich.that makes you a bigot.


That is pure BS. The fact remains the wealthy got a huge tax cut from Bush and the GOP that was justified by this surplus that did not exist. Thus there was NOTHING to give to the rich and that has created part of the deficit. We need to recapture that money that should not have been given to them and use it to repay the debt it helped create!

NOT ONE person on this Blog site has provided a single reason why the tax cut should have been passed given the fact there was no Surplus to return. As soon as it became clear the Bush Surplus was an illusion, the tax cuts should have ended as O’Neil and Greenspan said! It was clear by early 2002 there was no SURPLUS as Bush stated!


Reply By: DraginolPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Yes however that is not the issue. Is it better to prevent a mortgage created recession by helping millions of people to refinance their mortgages or accept what could be far more harmful situation by doing nothing?
So how much are you willing to donate? Why should my family sacrifice to bail other people out of their own greed and poor decisions?

If it prevents a recession it will help the wealthy and they have the resources to pay a little more in taxes.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Those who spend more than they make often end up begging for help in the end.


That is just what our country is doing by running annual budget deficits and in creating over $9 Trillion in debt!