Posts Made By: Richard Wright

One of these days, this election is going to be over.

I think the lack of optimisim comes from finding the financial sector has become a den of con men and criminals rather than the responsible agents of progress acting in enlightened self-interest we had thought were in those positions. Daily shifts in the stock market are worth more than the stimulous package it takes the government months to move on. The government is equipped to keep us from starving; not to setting up a sudden golden age out if disaster.

People may feel a little better knowing this administration is at least trying. The last guy started out on vacation and tapered off from there. But either way, there is no getting around seeing home sale prices in your own neighborhood taking a continuous dive. You've got to be pretty hard over on ideaology to ignore that. And I have yet to hear anyone say they think the government is going to be able to fix that, either. They may be able to slow down the rate of decline. As if yesterday, the news reported the average American family lost 22% of their net worth in 2008. Not a lot to cheer about, there.

Alan Josefsek said:

The questions to be asked is why the lack of optimism...the administration giving everyone a lack of confidence and the reckless spending and maybe them not wanting to fix the mortgage problem.

Then what? We need to move this to a positive statement of what IS rather than negative proof. We've got the "I'm not X, so you should imagine my views are what you would approve of" representation as it is. There has to be some indication the people going to Washington are there to represent the people, not push some arbitrary agenda. Do you feel like you are being represented? Why not? I know I sure as heck never called up my congressional delegation to tell them I wanted a capital gains tax cut. I never called them up to tell them I wanted bankruptcy law modified to favor credit card companies and landlords, so people let their houses get foreclosed on rather than skip credit card payments and stores would liquidate instead of trying to reorganize. I never called them up to say I wanted Credit Default Swaps to be unregulated. I tend to doubt you did, either. We had pharmaceutical companies writing the laws to govern themselves. In return, we got pills you take daily for the rest of your life to avoid restless legs instead of a cure for heart disease.

Someone is going to Washington. Who will it be, and what is it they are being sent there to do?

-Rich

Jeffrey Counsil said:

Specter is on the "gotta go" list.
And I agree, many more need to be "flushed" down the toilet where they belong. :S

I hate to be the one to point this out, but if what you say is true and the economy would bob back to the surface like a cork without the stimulus, then the stimulus will appear to work.

The data seems to argue otherwise. Our finance sector has run screaming off a cliff and we've just got giant wrecks of banks. I've seen housing prices in my state drop by 30% in the last year. Unemployment is skyrocketing, and this happened before the man in office changed.

Personally, I'm afraid we don't know what the worst is, yet. It seems there has been a long period where there was nobody minding the store. Criminals and con men took over. And there isn't a stripe of politician up to now who has done anything about it.

-Rich

Jeffrey Counsil said:

Paul McCarty said:

Our Grandchildren were already paying for the trillion dollars of war debt. How is it any different. Funny how it didn't matter 7 years ago.

So that makes it alright to dig them in deeper?? Gee, people hated Bush and the GOP for that, but it's fine and dandy if Obama and the socialists do it?? It's sad that our grandchildren will be saddled with this debt. What will be in Obama's legacy is he also indebted their Great Grandchildren! I don't know about you, but that sickens me..

Paul McCarty said:

One day the "special interests" will wake up realize Government is not needed and abolish it. They have already been whittling it down for the last 30 years or so.

They have, it's Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and "crew". Just look closely at what they are doing and whom they are doing it for.. Themselves and their "friends"!

Paul McCarty said:
No profit in government. Profit is good, right?

The Govt. is NOT supposed to be making "profit" from the citizens.. And they're NOT supposed to be strong-arming the profits FROM the citizens either!

Paul McCarty said:
When this happens, the indentured citizens will not be able to stop it.

That's why We The People need to stem the tide now.

It's really sad that people hammered the GOP supporters during the campaigns with "fear mongering". Boy, Obama has been doing that deliberately to try and garner support for his SPENDING bill (called stimulus). Yes, OBAMA HAS BEEN FEAR MONGERING! Telling people the country WILL FAIL if they don't pass this "plan".. "Disaster looms if we don't invest now".. What a bunch of crap!

I do. Though I know it isn't read until it comes with a nice hefty campaign contribution.

-Rich

Jeffrey Counsil said:

Richard, I DO e-mail and call my "representatives" quite often! Why don't you? After all, that's what they are there for..

Richard Wright said:

Then what? We need to move this to a positive statement of what IS rather than negative proof. We've got the "I'm not X, so you should imagine my views are what you would approve of" representation as it is. There has to be some indication the people going to Washington are there to represent the people, not push some arbitrary agenda. Do you feel like you are being represented? Why not? I know I sure as heck never called up my congressional delegation to tell them I wanted a capital gains tax cut. I never called them up to tell them I wanted bankruptcy law modified to favor credit card companies and landlords, so people let their houses get foreclosed on rather than skip credit card payments and stores would liquidate instead of trying to reorganize. I never called them up to say I wanted Credit Default Swaps to be unregulated. I tend to doubt you did, either. We had pharmaceutical companies writing the laws to govern themselves. In return, we got pills you take daily for the rest of your life to avoid restless legs instead of a cure for heart disease.

Someone is going to Washington. Who will it be, and what is it they are being sent there to do?

-Rich

Jeffrey Counsil said:

Specter is on the "gotta go" list.
And I agree, many more need to be "flushed" down the toilet where they belong. :S

That's just it, Chris, it doesn't matter if people are in variable interest loans or not. The problem is house values have imploded. In Phoenix, they are down over 40%. So people are in the predicament of having a $400,000 loan on a house now worth $240,000, and they've paid in $40,000 on the mortgage. There just isn't any point in worrying about the interest rate. Even if it were 0%, they can't sell for enough to pay back the mortgage. This is what happened back in the great depression. Then they had to change the law so all the bank could take was the house. That is why people are just mailing their keys to the bank, now. The stigma of defaulting on a loan is up against bankrupting your future to stay in the house. It is very easy to claim the problem is people buying things they couldn't afford, but that just isn't the case. The problem is anyone who bought a house in 2006 or 2007 is under water on their mortgage and sinking fast. One by one, they are concluding they can't throw that sum of money at a house which may not sell for that much possibly for decades.

The only cheap loans that would fix it would be ones adjusted for the decrease in value of the property. And that is the one thing the banks don't want to do, and are lobbying against because it will make them completely insolvent on paper. If the government does nothing, the banks will have to declare the value of their collateral at some point and be revealed to be insolvent, which literally would cause the US financial system to cease to exist. At that point we would be facing the realization the great depression wasn't a benchmark for as bad as things can get. So they are trying. I don't know if it will seem to do much of anything besides buy time. But time is useful, too.

As for the proposal to make new loans available at low rates. Having people buy houses which would go under water even before the loan was approved is one of the few things one could do to make this situation worse because it puts the banks in a bigger hole and the tax payers right along with them.

We are in bad shape. Yeah, a lot of people made mistakes to get us here. A lot of them have views I disagree with. But we are at the point now where we can decide to try to fix the blame or fix the problem. I choose to try to fix the problem. Yeah, a lot of people will have a lot to be angry about. I am one of them. But we don't even know how bad it is, yet. Look on www.zillow.com at your local housing values. Look at the slope on the devaluation. It is accelerating. I don't see how any government action can fix that. But maybe they can slow it down.

-Rich

Chris Provost said:

We are screwed no matter what side of the aisle you agree with. Spending is not the way to fix this problem though. If we are going to go even further into debt, why not give working, tax paying Americans large low interest loans? Talk about economic stimulus! If you own a home, have children, and have a REAL work history that meets some sort of minimum then you should qualify for some help. Can't pay your mortgage and you were not one of the idiots that took a variable rate loan...then let the the liberals buy your mortgage, and offer you a very, very low fixed rate. Can't feed your kids, or put them through college then let the left wingers pay for that too, and keep their grubby little paws out of medicine. The government doesn't work, for you or me just for themselves. I'm in a crunch now and I expect things to get much, much worse but I don't want the government "fixing" my problems. Investing in education and regulating corrupt banks will fix everything sooner than pouring a trillion dollars down the crapper.

Chris

Indeed. As my reward for many years of work and slowly saving to build up a 401K, saving to make a down payment on a house I could afford, and doing my best to look after my family, I am rewarded by seeing half of my investments evaporate in a year while my house is dropping in value each month by more than a mortgage payment. Shucks, wouldn't it make me feel a little better to know anyone I thought was less better prepared than me REALLY got hammered and lost everything so they ended up living in their car? Sure, that will put me deep under water on my house, and probably people will literally be starving in this country, but at least I would have the satisfaction of punishing people for their pursuit of happiness.

-Rich

Jeffrey Counsil said:

Well said James! Too bad too many believe in handouts instead of working for it themselves. Rewards aren't given, rewards are EARNED. Those that feel "entitled" want to steal it from you (through legislation) instead of earn it themselves. Then those (3 you mentioned and more) will take the glory of (I gave it to you) by stealing it from you and handing it to "them", the "entitled". This so-called "stimulus handout plan" is stealing from those who haven't even been born yet. Nice job Nancy, Barry, Joe, Harry, and....

My point is the fairness is irrelevant. But we can't say too bad to anyone who bought a house in the past 4 years as though they were separate from the rest of us. The problem is, the fate of the entire housing and financial sectors is tied to everything else. So while there is a visceral bit of joy in thinking at least we aren't the ones on the elevator with the broken cable, that's the wrong analogy. We all need businesses to be able to get loans. Broken banks won't do that. We all need there to be such a thing as stable investments. And now there aren't. We can lie to ourselves and claim some sort of moral superiority over the people sitting on the other side of the plane, but we are going where they are. Yes, the arrival times may be slightly different. But that isn't much help in a crash.

Mike Hosea said:

I think the "it's not fair" sentiment resonates deep in the human psyche. It comes from somewhere inside us at an early age. Fairness remains an unrealized ideal. Almost nothing in life is really fair. As George Carlin once said, death is one of the fairest things we've got--everybody get's just one.

Since I have given up on "fairness" in life, I would just like to see that tax dollars are spent well. I think the investment in infrastructure is a good idea. Infrastructure is one of the things government is for. I worry, however, about that forestalling home devaluation is both futile and undesirable. When the growth of home values has outstripped inflation in the past (especially true here in the Boston area since 2000), corrections are not unhealthy things, despite the pain that any homeowner who bought in high must feel. C'est la vie. I think government should focus on doing what government in the US is supposed to do, and that should not, IMO, include trying to manipulate fair market prices of anything.

Jeff,

The really evil thing in all of this is how a very few people with a wad of cash entrusted to them really found a way to abuse the responsibility. But we are where we are. The banks killed themselves trying to throw securities together for investors to throw money at. But just because we aren't them, it doesn't mean there are no consequences for us. I am not a fan of saving people who caused this. I am less of a fan of letting the country fall apart. Remember, the great depression was a 10% reduction in consumer spending. We've seen that happening now. It's beyond the point of worrying someone who got a variable rate loan without a job is going to lose their house. What we are talking about is it doesn't matter that stupid kids set the building on fire. Someone has to put it out.

Jeffrey Counsil said:

Ah, but I *can* say that I am separate! *I* did not buy a house. Your delusion that *everyone* has a mortgage, that everyone rides the elevator, and that everyone even cares about the housing and financial Fat-Cats is simply too narrow minded. I am NOT lying to myself one bit and your claim to it being some kind of moral issue is insulting. Trying to prey on people to guilt them into handing money to people whom still have 6 figure incomes is absurd and self-serving. All you want is for me, who didn't buy a home, who didn't have "investments" (READ Didn't take a risk) to now pay *you* for *your* risks YOU took? YOU are the one who went out on a limb for YOUR chance to gain. *NOT* me. Those Banks that were so greedy MUST fail! THEY took risks, NOT ME. They were unethical, NOT ME. *I* had ZERO say in any of it. THEY are still RICH and whine about wanting their asses "saved" (READ Rewarded and Keep their spoils) for bad behavior and making BAD choices. THEY are the ones who should PAY for their actions! NOT the American Taxpayer!
You all talk about taking responsibility for ones's actions. So where are the consequences of those actions?? Why are you so willing to HELP those that HURT YOU???
Sure, I can feel bad about a lot of people getting caught up in all this. But *I* didn't do it to them! If you want to go after someone, go after the ONES WHO CAUSED THE DAMAGE! You do NOT punish Mike for what greedy jerk Joe did! Where are your ethics??

Richard Wright said:

My point is the fairness is irrelevant. But we can't say too bad to anyone who bought a house in the past 4 years as though they were separate from the rest of us. The problem is, the fate of the entire housing and financial sectors is tied to everything else. So while there is a visceral bit of joy in thinking at least we aren't the ones on the elevator with the broken cable, that's the wrong analogy. We all need businesses to be able to get loans. Broken banks won't do that. We all need there to be such a thing as stable investments. And now there aren't. We can lie to ourselves and claim some sort of moral superiority over the people sitting on the other side of the plane, but we are going where they are. Yes, the arrival times may be slightly different. But that isn't much help in a crash.

Mike Hosea said:

I think the "it's not fair" sentiment resonates deep in the human psyche. It comes from somewhere inside us at an early age. Fairness remains an unrealized ideal. Almost nothing in life is really fair. As George Carlin once said, death is one of the fairest things we've got--everybody get's just one.

Since I have given up on "fairness" in life, I would just like to see that tax dollars are spent well. I think the investment in infrastructure is a good idea. Infrastructure is one of the things government is for. I worry, however, about that forestalling home devaluation is both futile and undesirable. When the growth of home values has outstripped inflation in the past (especially true here in the Boston area since 2000), corrections are not unhealthy things, despite the pain that any homeowner who bought in high must feel. C'est la vie. I think government should focus on doing what government in the US is supposed to do, and that should not, IMO, include trying to manipulate fair market prices of anything.

If I were to judge from this thread, suggesting good auto maintenance back during the campaign is the most controversial thing Barack Obama has said or done. Huh, there must be nothing else to find fault with.

-Rich

Don Barar said:

I can. As a result of that claim, McCain released the infamous "Tire Gauge" that had the words "Obama Energy Plan" on the side. I gave $50 as a campaign contribution so that I could get one of those tire gauges. McCain got the money. I never got the gauge.