http://www.youtube.com/watc...ture=player_embedded

96% of bad mortgage debt is owned/backed by the federal government. Interestingly, NONE of the major news outlets have mentioned this story. Food for thought.

It won't fly in this country except in the minds of those who are deep in debt. The millions and millions of the majority of Americans who work, scrimp and sacrifice each month to faithfully repay their loans would take umbrage over it, and the results at re-election time would reflect that anger, tho I do understand how some could see the attractiveness of getting something for free, that others had to pay for.

In a "normal" (IE: gold/ silver standard) banking system, I would agree....however, with fractal reserve banking--frack 'em .....they "created" the money out of thin air (in essence loaning what doenst exist--nothing......then let them "create" the payment out of thin air and recieve back exactly what they "loaned"--nothing

I would really-really-really like to be able to get away with "loaning" somebody a Lotus Esprit I dont have and doesnt exist just by writing down I did, then forcing them to give me a real one when they return the "loan"

As far as I am concerned---let the banks fail and the system collapse, and start again from scratch with an HONEST system. So long as the fraud of fractal banking exists, my sympathy for the banksters is in the dictionary, about 1/2-way between sheet and syphalis.

[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 05-07-2012).]

quote Originally posted by maryjane: It won't fly in this country except in the minds of those who are deep in debt. The millions and millions of the majority of Americans who work, scrimp and sacrifice each month to faithfully repay their loans would take umbrage over it, and the results at re-election time would reflect that anger, tho I do understand how some could see the attractiveness of getting something for free, that others had to pay for.

While getting out of my mortgage sounds freaking awesome. I would have to question where the money would come from. I personally wouldn't support any candidate that was on board with this. It would honestly send me in to an extreme level of pissed off, as I think it would MILLIONS of other Americans. Well at least the ones who are self-centered pieces of crap. I've had to work hard and sacrifice to get where I am today (which I personally feel is still behind the 8-ball). Erasing the mortgages of all those people who acted poorly and irresponsibly is absurd at best.

I am not sure where this idea of stimulus came from, but have any of them ever worked? It seems odd that giving money away like that would help boost the economy, I mean the money does have to come from somewhere, right?

Better use of a stimulus IMHO... by ryan.hess
How would that be better ... what would it solve ?

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: 96% of bad mortgage debt is owned/backed by the federal government.

So, the gooberment would give money to themselves ? It would, again, go to the rich bankers ? Why does stimulus have to be cash ? We are over regulated. Much deregulation would stimulate the economy. If we are gonna throw cash at it(?), why not throw it to the ones being responsible ? The same ones who are having to pay for it.

Why any stimulus? Just let the banks that made the stupid loans go broke, including Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Somehow it also should be noted that the government was the one that pushed the banks to make the stupid loans with their elimination of "Redlining". Then they sweetened the pot for the banks by having Freddie and Fannie take over the loans when they were bundled. So the banks would make the loans making a big bit of money on the transactions and then bundle them off to Freddie and Fannie and other big investment corps so they were not even on the books of the banks. Somehow they never realized that giving loans to people that could not afford them would not work in the long run and the whole thing had to collapse sooner or later. It was a bad business decision based on pressure and gifts from the Federal government. When you make bad business decisions you should pay the price not get bailed out.

We the normal hard working individuals are the ones who will have to pay for these stupid decisions. Either by taxes or by inflation because of the Fed printing more and more money making what you have worth less. I believe that it has been said that inflation is the invisible tax that hits the middle class the hardest. And just think as inflation works its way through the system normal middle class income will become taxed at the "evil rich rate". Just what you need. This country is in a major decline right now because of these types of policies and unless it is stopped we are going to collapse economically, just like Europe is going to do.

So no more gifts from the Government. We cannot afford them.

Alway a great idea of having someone else pay your bills. I'll sit on a corner with my tin cup waiting for aother Obama handout that you pay for.

It would never work. Iceland is about the size (guesstimating) of the population of Houston, TX.

What works there may well cause a catastrophic monetary issue here.

Yeah, but ya get something for nothing (other than what is already invested)--something others had to pay for when they got one. What's not to like about getting something for free that was intended to be puchased?
What a deal!! I want clothes, food, cars, --EVERYTHING--and I'm NOT going to pay for it!!
Entitlement nation, fed and nurtured.

quote Originally posted by MadMark: Why any stimulus? Just let the banks that made the stupid loans go broke, including Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Somehow it also should be noted that the government was the one that pushed the banks to make the stupid loans with their elimination of "Redlining". Then they sweetened the pot for the banks by having Freddie and Fannie take over the loans when they were bundled. So the banks would make the loans making a big bit of money on the transactions and then bundle them off to Freddie and Fannie and other big investment corps so they were not even on the books of the banks. Somehow they never realized that giving loans to people that could not afford them would not work in the long run and the whole thing had to collapse sooner or later. It was a bad business decision based on pressure and gifts from the Federal government. When you make bad business decisions you should pay the price not get bailed out. We the normal hard working individuals are the ones who will have to pay for these stupid decisions. Either by taxes or by inflation because of the Fed printing more and more money making what you have worth less. I believe that it has been said that inflation is the invisible tax that hits the middle class the hardest. And just think as inflation works its way through the system normal middle class income will become taxed at the "evil rich rate". Just what you need. This country is in a major decline right now because of these types of policies and unless it is stopped we are going to collapse economically, just like Europe is going to do. So no more gifts from the Government. We cannot afford them.

No more gifts from the government ?
Someone did not drink their koolaid, off to re-education camp.
No more gifts to the gooberment.

quote Originally posted by htexans1: It would never work. Iceland is about the size (guesstimating) of the population of Houston, TX. What works there may well cause a catastrophic monetary issue here.

Not a great a estimate. Population 317,398
Whereas Houston has a population of about 2.2 million.

I can't say for certain if it will work for them or not. I can't imagine how it could though. I guess if you have a REALLY small population like that, you could get socialism working a lot better than in a huge one such as our countries. I mean, socialism sounds really great. Everyone gets equal everything. I don't think it has shown in cases of where it has worked on a large scale though.

quote Originally posted by MidEngineManiac: As far as I am concerned---let the banks fail and the system collapse, and start again from scratch with an HONEST system.

If you want a preview of that scenario, just look to Haiti. Not my idea of a good outcome, or even a good alternative to what we have now ... even with all its problems.

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: If you want a preview of that scenario, just look to Haiti. Not my idea of a good outcome, or even a good alternative to what we have now ... even with all its problems.

Respectfully, the Haitian example you reference is but just one way that scenario could play out. Perhaps if you would be more specific. We have had banks fail before.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: We have had banks fail before.

Agreed ... but we've never just "let ... the system collapse" before, which is what MEM is advocating. Perhaps the closest we've come was the Great Depression of the 1930s. I don't think most people can appreciate just what a total system collapse would entail.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 05-07-2012).]

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: Agreed ... but we've never just "let ... the system collapse" before, which is what MEM is advocating. Perhaps the closest we've come was the Great Depression of the 1930s. I don't think most people can appreciate just what a total system collapse would entail.

Yes.

It was a whisper a way in 2008 according to what I've read and watched. Stories of Hank Paulson dry-heaving in meetings and such, I don't think some people realize how close to a total meltdown it actually was.

Let the system collapse??? No thank you.

Well, if we can't have global thermonuclear war, a total economic meltdown will do I suppose..........Those who whine about how bad they have it today, would still desperately wish they had today back after it all falls, so it's all good--either way--I'm on board.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: We have had banks fail before.

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: Agreed ... but we've never just "let ... the system collapse" before, which is what MEM is advocating. Perhaps the closest we've come was the Great Depression of the 1930s. I don't think most people can appreciate just what a total system collapse would entail.

I was thinking of the Great Depression. Which is why I mentioned the Haitian example as being only one way the scenario could work out. I am mildly familiar with the total collapse during the Great Depression, through history teachings. I can not see myself appreciating, personally, what a total system collapse would entail. Heh, the way the Great Depression played out is just but one way it could have.
I am no scholar. My opinions may be/likely are misguided. I would be interested in the opinions of the forum.
I have heard arguments, pro and con, that Roosevelt's New Deal and his other economic policies needlessly extended the recovery time. One proponent of Roosevelt's New Deal but critic of his other economic policies (mainly trying to maintain a balanced budget) was John Maynard Keynes, who is credited with the term Keynesian economics, which Obama believes in.
I also note with interest the comparison between the Roaring Twenties under the conservatives and the Great Depression which followed during liberal rule. There being so many possible variables and I not having enough education, I can only suspect a similar cause and effect between the economies in the Bush years (till the Dems got Congress in 06) and the Obama years. Though the discussion would have zealots on both sides, I would love to hear it.
Myself, I would have liked to see the "too big to fail" companies fail, some being banks. To me, it would have been like a giant reset button. Many of the 1% became 99 percenters and room opened up at the top for new blood. If people could not appreciate what the hardships would entail, well, what don't kill you makes you stronger. We have become too mentally weak. I think people need to start learning how to take care of themselves, which a collapse would encourage.