Nobama promised that there will be no more bailouts. Yet, Detriot, and Michigan, are a bastion of Dumbocratic votes. Another member supplied the link. Which mentions 300 million. I had heard 100 million and that it was not a bail out, that it had been in the works. Under the guise of the Federal initiative of "Blight Fight". It is not a federal job to fight blight on a local level.
So is this like declaring a national disaster area then?
Heck it has been a battlezone for quite some time. Maybe we could declare it a war zone and then send in the troops.... there seems to be plenty of money available for military actions
IP: Logged
11:03 AM
cliffw Member
Posts: 36028 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by jaskispyder: Maybe we could declare it a war zone and then send in the troops.... there seems to be plenty of money available for military actions
Well, I had heard that they wanted to bring in the Michigan National Guard. "They" being I forget who. The Governor, perhaps the Mayor. Illegal under the Constitution.
IP: Logged
11:29 AM
jaskispyder Member
Posts: 21510 From: Northern MI Registered: Jun 2002
Well, I had heard that they wanted to bring in the Michigan National Guard. "They" being I forget who. The Governor, perhaps the Mayor. Illegal under the Constitution.
Many have suggested Detroit utilize the National Guard in some way, whether it be to knock down vacant houses or help local law enforcement, but Logan said that wouldn’t be received well by citizens.
“To be perfectly honest with you, my recollection of the National Guard, the last time they were in Detroit goes back to the ’67 riot. And it’s kind of hard for me to get beyond that right now, and I’m certain a lot of people in the community think about the National Guard and the ’67 riot,” said Logan.
Instead, Bing said having increased assistance from Michigan State Police would be more helpful in the place where the city needs it the most: the streets.
“I’m not so interested in the National Guard coming in, but more state police would be helpful. Anytime you can get additional police on the street, I think we would be receptive to that,” he said, adding that gun control is obviously a huge issue in the city.
“Out of the 386 homicides, 333 were perpetrated by guns. And so, some kind of way we’ve got to figure out how we can get guns out of the hands of the criminals. I know a lot of our citizens are going out and buying guns to protect themselves right now, but they are not the people perpetrating crimes right now. It’s the bad guys and believe me, there are people within families, within the community who know who these guys are and they’ve got to let the police know so that the police can do their job,” said Bing.
Detroit city leaders aren’t just looking at Michigan resources for help either. They’re reaching out to law enforcement and government officials in other areas, such as New York, where authorities have been successful in curtailing the crime statistics.
“I’m not opposed to getting in contact with the mayor or anybody else who may be able to help us based on some success factors that they’ve had,” said Bing.
“One of the things that we’re going to do, probably next week, is we’re going to reach out to the police department [in New York] to at least take a look at some of the things they’re doing,” said Logan.
And they’ll take all suggestions into consideration, but Logan said they intend on preserving the integrity of the Detroit Police Department.
“We have to be very, very careful on how we police. In the city of Detroit, it probably can be said that we have one of the best constitutional police departments in the country, and we want to make sure that we don’t lose that,” said Logan.
IP: Logged
11:39 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Don't know about Nancy, I guess you follow her more than I do (which is never).
As for a Michigan's transparency reporting, I found Texas' version via google, and if you are so interested, you may want to search there for it.
It's easier to enjoy politics if you only follow people who say what you want to hear isn't it? You must have missed it, but there's been some debate about spending recently and where budget cuts could be made. Nancy said there was simply no where the budget could be cut. I guess she meant there was no more money available - except for money they want to spend.
Oh, and there's a thing in Syria too. Just in case you missed it.
IP: Logged
12:30 PM
jaskispyder Member
Posts: 21510 From: Northern MI Registered: Jun 2002
It's easier to enjoy politics if you only follow people who say what you want to hear isn't it? You must have missed it, but there's been some debate about spending recently and where budget cuts could be made. Nancy said there was simply no where the budget could be cut. I guess she meant there was no more money available - except for money they want to spend.
Oh, and there's a thing in Syria too. Just in case you missed it.
And what information did you get out of listening to Nancy? ... "except for money they want to spend".... Now, I know she didn't say that, so obviously you didn't take her words as the truth, and instead you substituted your own. So, even if you listen to her, you still ignore/discount what she said. Now, what was that you said about "what you want to hear"?
IP: Logged
12:51 PM
PFF
System Bot
partfiero Member
Posts: 6923 From: Tucson, Arizona Registered: Jan 2002
.. And what information did you get out of listening to Nancy? ... "except for money they want to spend".... Now, I know she didn't say that, so obviously you didn't take her words as the truth, and instead you substituted your own.
She said : "no more cuts to make." "Because the cupboard is bare. There's no more cuts to make," "It's really important that people understand that. We all want to reduce the deficit." "You cannot have any more cuts just for the sake of cuts," http://www.washingtonpost.c...o-more-cuts-to-make/
Not spending is a cut.
Taking into account this new spending in Detroit, there are conclusions to draw.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 09-27-2013).]
IP: Logged
01:30 PM
Tony Kania Member
Posts: 20794 From: The Inland Northwest Registered: Dec 2008
Jakispyder... Why is your first post always a deflection, blame, or excuse? Every time you are the first with a rebuttal, and always one of the ways I mentioned. Can the democrats do no wrong?
BTW, you seem to know less about Detroit than you say. Reading the papers is NOT a correct description of the city I grew up in. I often want to correct you, but I try not to be argumentative with you.
IP: Logged
01:38 PM
jaskispyder Member
Posts: 21510 From: Northern MI Registered: Jun 2002
And what is that conclusion? She lied? That isn't new information.
I didnt realize this was only about gathering new information. This could be called more evidence I suppose, and evidence is information.
With most of these politics talks it seems we already know what is going on , all that ever happens is proving our points all along. Pelosi is more of the same.
* I was pointing out what he said, that you disagreed with, was the truth. If you disagree.. point out why.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 09-27-2013).]
IP: Logged
01:45 PM
Mickey_Moose Member
Posts: 7509 From: Edmonton, AB, Canada Registered: May 2001
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Federal Housing Administration said on Friday it will draw US$1.7 billion in cash from the U.S. Treasury to help cover losses from troubled loans, marking the first time in its 79-year history that it has needed aid.
The agency, which offers mortgage lenders guarantees against homeowner defaults, does not have enough cash to cover projected losses on the loans it backs, senior Obama administration officials said. They said the FHA needs the subsidy to shore up its insurance fund by the end of its budget year on Monday in order to maintain a required capital cushion. While the FHA had been expected to draw from the Treasury, the cash infusion, which Republicans have dubbed a bailout, will heighten the political tension over the government’s pervasive role in the mortgage market.
Taxpayers have already propped up mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the tune of US$187.5 billion, although those government-controlled companies are now profitable and will have returned US$146 billion in dividends to the Treasury by the end of the month for the taxpayer stake.
Including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, federal housing agencies support about nine in 10 new U.S. mortgages.
“As expected, we will be required to take a transfer in order for us to close our financial statement,” a senior administration official told reporters. “It isn’t a reflection of the current performance of our portfolio. There’s been a significant improvement.”
The cash infusion marks what could be considered a book end to the 2007-2009 financial crisis, which was sparked by a burst U.S. housing bubble that sent home prices tumbling.
White House officials projected in April that the FHA would face a shortfall of US$943 million in the fiscal year that is drawing to a close, and some analysts predicted an improving housing market might allow it to avoid tapping what is essentially a credit line it has with Treasury.
The FHA said it has more than US$30 billion in cash and investments on hand to pay potential claims, but that it does not have enough to meet a legally required 2% capital ratio, which is a measure of its ability to withstand losses. Advertisement
“Although this one-time transfer of funds from the Treasury is legally necessary, it’s important to note that FHA is far from bankrupt,” said Representative Maxine Waters, a California Democratic who is a strong supporter of programs that help low-income borrowers. Waters noted that the FHA continues to generate revenue.
Since the cash draw from Treasury will not be disbursed by the FHA, it will not impact how quickly the government runs out of money to pay its bills under the nation’s US$16.7 trillion debt ceiling. In addition, the Treasury has the authority to take the US$1.7 billion back once the FHA rebuilds its reserves.
When the White House made its prediction, the FHA said it needed to see if an increase in insurance premiums on the loans it backs and rising home values would close its funding gap.
But a spike in interest rates reduced the volume of new FHA-backed loans, tempering the hoped-for increase in premium-related income and worsening its projected shortfall.
The FHA is legally required to keep a 2% capital ratio, which is a measure of the fund’s ability to withstand losses, but it has failed to meet that threshold since 2009.
Senior administration officials said nearly US$70 billion in losses were due to loans issued between 2007 and 2009 as the U.S. housing bust deepened, and that they expected the agency’s finances to improve in coming months.
Metrics of the current portfolio show that the money the agency is recovering on foreclosed properties is improving and early payment defaults are down dramatically.
After an independent audit in November found that its insurance fund could face losses as high as US$16.3 billion, the FHA raised the amount it charges borrowers to insure mortgages against default and tightened underwriting. The changes, coupled with rising home prices, helped shrink the projected gap.
Loans originated in the past few years have been performing better. The number of loans seriously delinquent, or 90 days past due, at the end of July was 15% below the level of a year earlier and the lowest point in almost three years.
REVERSE MORTGAGE IMPACT
The FHA has said its cash needs were mainly driven by losses from reverse mortgages, which allow homeowners age 62 or older to withdraw equity and repay it only when their homes are sold. The agency, which is expected to spend US$2.8 billion this year insuring reverse mortgages, backs 90% of such loans.
It has already announced new guidelines for potential reverse mortgage borrowers, including lower limits on the amount seniors can withdraw, higher mortgage insurance fees and tougher vetting of applicants. Those changes, however, do not go into effect until Tuesday.
Republicans have argued the FHA needs to take more aggressive action to protect taxpayers, including reducing maximum loan limits and raising minimum down payments.
The Obama administration contends some of those steps would undermine its mission to provide credit to first-time home buyers and needy communities.
The FHA has played a critical role supporting the housing market by insuring mortgages for borrowers who make down payments of as little as 3.5%. The FHA insures about US$1.1 trillion in mortgages and now backs about one third of all new loans used to purchase homes, up from about 5% in 2006.
IP: Logged
01:46 PM
jaskispyder Member
Posts: 21510 From: Northern MI Registered: Jun 2002
Jakispyder... Why is your first post always a deflection, blame, or excuse? Every time you are the first with a rebuttal, and always one of the ways I mentioned. Can the democrats do no wrong?
BTW, you seem to know less about Detroit than you say. Reading the papers is NOT a correct description of the city I grew up in. I often want to correct you, but I try not to be argumentative with you.
Interesting. I state that detroit is not the only city to use federal money for blighted homes.... which is not an excuse, deflection or blame. It is putting cliffw's comments into prospective that detroit is not the only city benefiting from federal dollars, as it is helpful to see that not just Michigan is receiving benefits. Plus, where does it state there is a bailout? Or shall we accept that statement as true?
I also ask Cliffw to clarify his statement with proof, about calling in the national guard.... did I blame, delfect or create an excuse? He made the statement, I could not find evidence to support his statement. But I am called out for this?
Tony, it isn't worth the time to even talk about this anymore (not singling you out.... just a general comment)....
IP: Logged
01:58 PM
2.5 Member
Posts: 43226 From: Southern MN Registered: May 2007
It is not a federal job to fight blight on a local level.
I agree. But, If you qualify for a refund on some or all or even more than you paid in why not get in line and claim your check. Somebody is going to get it so until the well dries up "get sum". Maybe some one in Detroit will put the money to good use and produce a clean slate ready for redevelopment. One could only hope the money is well spent but holding your breath would be ill advised.
Every time you are the first with a rebuttal, and always one of the ways I mentioned. Can the democrats do no wrong? 
