COL Gene COL Gene

Bush Mortgage Action TOO Little TOO Late!

▼

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
23,339 views 73 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
That is just what our country is doing by running annual budget deficits and in creating over $9 Trillion in debt!
Trolling
Insightful






End of quote



and has been for 230 years.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
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.
End of quote


the fact is they deserve an even bigger tax cut.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
I like Gene's bold. It reminds me of who I'm dealing with, and then I only have to read the main point of whatever he said without bothering with the rest of it.

The government isn't bailing PEOPLE out of mortgages. It's bailing mortgage companies (aka THE RICH) out of bad risks they shouldn't have taken in the first place.

The consumer also took risks, but the fact is, if the consumer loses a house, he probably won't pay off the mortgage ever. He will rent for the rest of his life. And the mortgage company will never see the money. All this is doing is sending money through the hands of the poor into the hands of the wealthy.

It's the opposite effect of the tax cuts to the wealthy. There, the government let the wealthy keep more of their money - instead of keeping it, they hired more people, so the poor actually ended up better off. Raising taxes on the wealthy will not keep the money out of the wealthy's hands - it'll keep it out of the poor's hands, because the wealthy will take the same amount as always.

So basically, Gene, it's okay to raise taxes on the wealthy (hurting the poor) but it's also a great idea to give money to the poor so they can turn around and give it right to the wealthy.

Gene, I know you want to help the poor by taking from the rich - but the policies you support do the exact opposite.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gene, I know you want to help the poor by taking from the rich - but the policies you support do the exact opposite.
End of quote


he won't get it
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
just like he doesn't understand that universal health care does the same thing.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
I thought Hillary was for 'mandatory health care' which just hurts the poor who can't afford health care by putting them in prison/fining them for not having healthcare, which, as I've already stated, they can't even afford.

If she's for universal healthcare, that's a completely different animal. Say goodbye to choices. Say goodbye to reason in the healthcare industry. It's not like it wasn't already on the way out, but it will be gone in a flash if we go to a universal healthcare system.
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
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.
the fact is they deserve an even bigger tax cut.


You do not know what you are talking about. Please explain WHY?


Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, December 21, 2007
Gene, I know you want to help the poor by taking from the rich - but the policies you support do the exact opposite.
he won't get it


Tell that to the millions of Kids that do not have health insurance because Bush Vetoed the S-CHIP Bill. Tell that to disabled who could not live without housing assistance and food stamps. Tell that to the poor who could not get health care without Medicaid. This help is for the MOST basic Human needs and to watch the way the wealthy live and listen to the dribble on JoeUser about protecting the rich while ignoring the very poor makes me sick.
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
This help is for the MOST basic Human needs and to watch the way the wealthy live and listen to the dribble on JoeUser about protecting the rich while ignoring the very poor makes me sick.
End of quote


The rich don't need protection. They're find by themselves. And when you start to make their lives miserable by taxing them more, they are the ones that have the resources to go elsewhere. Or live off what they already have, instead of producing wealth for the government.

To watch the way the poor live and still call them poor makes me sick. Health insurance is not a need, Gene. The disabled have help. The poor have help. Increasing the limits is only going to help the middle class. The poor are taken care of, as long as they don't try to climb at all.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
This help is for the MOST basic Human needs and to watch the way the wealthy live and listen to the dribble on JoeUser about protecting the rich while ignoring the very poor makes me sick.
End of quote




i thought the most basic human needs was food and sleep.
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: JythierPosted: Saturday, December 22, 2007
This help is for the MOST basic Human needs and to watch the way the wealthy live and listen to the dribble on JoeUser about protecting the rich while ignoring the very poor makes me sick.
The rich don't need protection. They're find by themselves. And when you start to make their lives miserable by taxing them more, they are the ones that have the resources to go elsewhere. Or live off what they already have, instead of producing wealth for the government.


Taxing the rich will not cause them any RERAL harm. They will not go to bed hungry or their kids will not suffer from a lack of medical treatment. All it will do is impact their GREED! They may have to only replace their fleet of Rolls Royce’s every other year rather then every year!
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Saturday, December 22, 2007
This help is for the MOST basic Human needs and to watch the way the wealthy live and listen to the dribble on JoeUser about protecting the rich while ignoring the very poor makes me sick.
i thought the most basic human needs was food and sleep.


and housing, clothing, medical care, transportation.
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
Tell that to the millions of Kids that do not have health insurance because Bush Vetoed the S-CHIP Bill.
End of quote


That is not the reason they do not have health insurance, Gene, though I'm sure you could care less about the distinction. It is ironic in the extreme that a blog devoted to "truth" is so devoid of it.
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
clothing, medical care, transportation
End of quote


you can do with out these.


and that is what city buses are for.
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: DaiwaPosted: Saturday, December 22, 2007
Tell that to the millions of Kids that do not have health insurance because Bush Vetoed the S-CHIP Bill.
That is not the reason they do not have health insurance, Gene,


YES it is. If Bush had not vetoed the S-CHIP they would have health insurance they do not have today!
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is ironic in the extreme that a blog devoted to "truth" is so devoid of it.


All that I post is "TRUTH" The problem with you and others on this Blog Site is that you do not want to admit the truth because the TRUTH shows Bush and the GOP for what they are—Scrooges!
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

YES it is. If Bush had not vetoed the S-CHIP they would have health insurance they do not have today!
End of quote





hate to break this to you gene, but most of us on here would have vetoed it too.
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
All it will do is impact their GREED!
End of quote


You continue to fail to understand that it WILL NOT IMPACT THEIR GREED EITHER!
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
the only greedy one on here gene is you.
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielostPosted: Saturday, December 22, 2007
YES it is. If Bush had not vetoed the S-CHIP they would have health insurance they do not have today!
hate to break this to you gene, but most of us on here would have vetoed it too.


That means that you are just like Bush

Reply By: danielostPosted: Saturday, December 22, 2007the only greedy one on here gene is you.


Anyone that supports what Bush and the GOP do is GREEDY!
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
Anyone that supports what Bush and the GOP do is GREEDY!
End of quote


no someone who wants what someone else has is greedy.


it doesn't matter if they hide behind helping the poor or not it is still greed.


and it is against at least one of the ten commandments.


which as a Christian you are supposed to believe in.
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
which as a Christian you are supposed to believe in.


No one that is a Christian can support turning our backs on the children or by starting a war that was not justified. We were not in ANY danger from Saddam and Bush lied about the danger from Iraq. Mike Huckabee is correct about the Bush Foreign policy.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
Say I have gross revenues of $10,000,000 a year, pay salary to employees of $5,000,000 per year, other fixed expenses of $4,000,000, and take home $1,000,000 in profits. Now, about half of that is going to the government through taxes, so I really only get $500,000. I like this amount of money. Now, you raise taxes on me because I'm in the top 10%. Do I now take home $400,000? No - I cut $200,000 in salaries so I can still take home my $500,000. Now 4 workers are out of work instead of working happily, because you raised my taxes. The tax increase did not affect me at all. I'm still just as money-grubbing as before. But you did affect the poor you're trying to help.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top

If it prevents a recession it will help the wealthy and they have the resources to pay a little more in taxes.
End of quote

But you don't know if it will prevent a recession or not. The people who need bailing out aren't exactly big contributors to the economy.

If you are so certain it would, then why don't you pay the same increase that you espouse I pay?

Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top

Anyone that supports what Bush and the GOP do is GREEDY!
End of quote

How do you define, "greedy", Gene?  I pay vastly  more than you do in taxes. I am sure I give away more money each year than you do by far to those who "need" it.

People who demand the property of others while giving nothing in return are the greedy ones.

Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: JythierPosted: Saturday, December 22, 2007Say I have gross revenues of $10,000,000 a year, pay salary to employees of $5,000,000 per year, other fixed expenses of $4,000,000, and take home $1,000,000 in profits. Now, about half of that is going to the government through taxes, so I really only get $500,000. I like this amount of money. Now, you raise taxes on me because I'm in the top 10%. Do I now take home $400,000? No - I cut $200,000 in salaries so I can still take home my $500,000. Now 4 workers are out of work instead of working happily, because you raised my taxes. The tax increase did not affect me at all. I'm still just as money-grubbing as before. But you did affect the poor you're trying to help.


That is not correct. Cheney had an income of $1.7 Million last year and paid 23% in income Tax. Cheney paid $6,045 in Social Security taxes or 3/10 of one percent. A person with an income of $100,000 pays the same dollar amount as Cheney or 6% or 20 times the % as Cheney.