Alerts are a great way for you to stay up-to-date on things you care about. We will email you a list of the new items that match your criteria at a time of your choosing.
We are going to end up with some really crummy legislation.
Well given the short notice I've done all I can in regards to contacting my represtitives. Sadly they'll push this bill out by the end of the week, and any complaints by the constituents will likely be ignored given the short time line.
It already appears this bill is actually going to end up worse. As oppopsed to just saying 'no', now they want to add in more measures (and money) to help the so called 'struggling homeowner' as well. It seems that the debate is always going to be around 'how' to spend the money, never 'if' money should be spent in the first place.
This will be expensive... very expensive.
This could be a tax fraud detection plan if implimented correctly, and could be done at least on a "break even" basis; but will the government ever listen to the people??????????
Sure the department may need a short term loan to get it to work, but the department's loans can easily be paid back by proper manipulation of the market and the securities.
I loved when Congress is asking if they think this plan will work, and there answer was more or less "We'll see". I also liked how they had no answeres of how they came up with the 700 Billion dollar price tag. They were not even sure of the plan yet because it would take months to figure out. But they need all 700 Billion now.
The best part was when they asked, "Well what happends when both of you leave office on Jan 20th"...There was silence for about 45 seconds.
I've been following a blog. My favorite post so far was:
"Inside the hearing room, snide laughter greeted Mr. Paulson’s line, “This is all about the American taxpayer.” What was your reaction?"
"they want to buy the banks student loans instead of bailing out the students."
Ummmm... why should we be bailing out student loans? It sounds like some populist leftists are trying to take advantage of this gigantic splurge to pass out entitlements to people who don't deserve it. Here, let's pay your tuition. Let's pay your mortgage too! Give me a break.
Somebody needs to get Paulsen and his crummy associates and tie him up until this coming election...and then when the new President comes in to place, whether it is democrat or republican we can open up the discussion again.
Oops..."tie them"
Somebody needs to get Paulsen and his crummy associates and tie him up until this coming election...and then when the new President comes in to place, whether it is democrat or republican we can open up the discussion again.
I would change the last part of what you said to:
'...and then when the new President comes in to place, whether it is democrat or republican we will NEVER open that discussion again.'
this is like the kids in control of the tv and soda and candy it will go on for ever until they destroy it all
We need to create an entity like the RTC to handle this. By the time they wrapped things up, the lose was much smaller than it would have been w/o the RTC.
We need to create an entity like the RTC to handle this. By the time they wrapped things up, the lose was much smaller than it would have been w/o the RTC
Anything to back that statement up other than your hubris opinion?
Did Joe Biden ask any questions? His questions oftne last for at elast 30 minutes.
There are a few known facts:
1) Fear drives markets
2) Greed drives decisions
3) Ethics can be compromised
When the savings & loan fiasco went down, many investments that were sound investments went down. As the RTC got rid of the bad investments and repackaged the good investments it made for a much smaller loss.
Was there greed beyond belief? You bet. Was it only from the top? Hell no! From the loan rep at the bottom of a lender driving a $100,000 car & living in a $1,000,000 home all the way up to the boss. And from the homeowner that acted like real estate could never go down! Did nobody remember the 1990's? There are many people that can afford their homes, however since it is worth less than they owe, they walk. How corrupt is that? People use their home like an ATM then walk & leave the bank holding the bag!
Let us remember that a home here in Orange County bought in 1999 or 2000 is still worth twice what it was then. Now how many other investments can you say that about?
They sound scare to me. The problem is that they are asking the people in power what to do... and the people in power want more power.
When the savings & loan fiasco went down, many investments that were sound investments went down. As the RTC got rid of the bad investments and repackaged the good investments it made for a much smaller loss.
Has that actually been properly calculated? How much money did the taxpayer have to spend?, what did the taxpayer get back? This is just another unsubstantiated claim. I will agree if you only look at half the ledger, then you can say 'wow, we made money' because, well if you don't count the taxpayer infusion as a 'cost'.
Was there greed beyond belief? You bet. Was it only from the top? Hell no! From the loan rep at the bottom of a lender driving a $100,000 car & living in a $1,000,000 home all the way up to the boss. And from the homeowner that acted like real estate could never go down! Did nobody remember the 1990's? There are many people that can afford their homes, however since it is worth less than they owe, they walk. How corrupt is that? People use their home like an ATM then walk & leave the bank holding the bag!
Lol, I love this two wrongs make a right nonsense. Some guy fleeces a bank, so the bank should get to fleece the taxpayer... who does the taxpayer get to fleece then?
At any rate, the bank could have EASILY prevented this scenario by SIMPLY demanding the owner contribute some equity to the purchase. I mean, there actually 'was' a reason for that old (and I guess 'archaic' to you) requirement that the purchaser put down 20% in order to get the loan. If the banks want to do something 'risky' (and as it turns out 'stupid') by lending 100% (or more) of the purchase price of an OBVIOUSLY inflated asset, then that is their risk to take. It obviously worked out well for them for a couple of years, but, now it has blown up in their face -- oops. Perhaps next time lenders won't be so stupid -- however, now with the bail out, it's all but guaranteed that they will be equally if not more stupid next time.
Let us remember that a home here in Orange County bought in 1999 or 2000 is still worth twice what it was then. Now how many other investments can you say that about?
You take a 'pre-bubble' price and compare it to a bubble price that hasn't finished correcting yet?
Prior to 1999 how great of an 'investment' was real estate? I'm not saying you can't find good real estate investments, but to make a sweeping generization that because real estate went up since 1999, that it will continue to go up forever and ever??
Oh, and technically an 'investment' should actually have a postive cashflow. So unless you're talking about rental properties, I have a hunch what you really mean is 'speculation'. Quite frankly single family houses have been a speculative gamble since 2003. Obviously the gamble worked out well until about 2005/2006. I doubt you'll see it paying out for a few years to come.
oh boy, another mrfnuts rant. Can mrfnuts get his own forum?
Ok Alpine, seriously... you work in the government, do you actually do 'anything' ?? What benefit are the taxpayers getting from your service? Do they know you just sit on zillow all day and harrass people?
WTF!!!!! I have a lot to learn!!! this MFker was the president of goldman sachs from '99 - 06', pretty much the duration of the bubble, and now wants to take all of the bad assets of the books of the banks just before he steps out of office (and probably moves to another country with warmer climate)... how did i miss that?? is there anything else i'm missing? someone please point me in the right direction as to where i can do some good informative reading...
This seems like total and completely unchallenged FRAUD of the american taxpayer. i can't believe this is happening.
Zillow® Advice depends on each member to keep it a safe, fun, and positive place. If you see abuse, flag it. More on our Good Neighbor Policy
Anyone watching this banking crisis hearing?
tldtms
Contributions: 784
View full profile
Here are some facts:
They dont want any regulation or oversight of the 700 Billion.
They want to bailout banks for student loans.
They want to bailout credit card debt for banks.
They say they will only spend 50 Billion per month
They will not be happy with 150 Billion every 3 months, they want it all now.
Paulson has known the CEO of goldman sachs since 1999, they are friends.
They want to bailout forign banks.
They claim their #1 issue is the American Tax Payer. However, they want to buy the banks student loans instead of bailing out the students.
If you find this content is in violation of our Good Neighbor Policy, please let us know and we will review it.
We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.