Again I say the problem is that those in the know, those with all that education, the stock broker, bankers that made all those loans to all those people who are going bankrupt right now.
They should have known that this was going to happen, I mean they are the smart ones right?
They have all the education in their respective fields.
So again I say it. the real problem was created by those with the power, money, education and they are not the ones getting hurt. The ones getting hurt are those who took their educated advise to BUY, BUY, BUY, BUY.
Okay Mr Bitter. We understand you have a bitterness towards education. You blame anyone with an education for the economy's faults. You find the economy now going into a depression is what you have stated in an earlier post. We've discussed this over and over. Now, if we have exhausted the discussion. We basically know everyone's position.
What's your solution? What's your thought on a fix?
Me, I find the economy is going just fine and will continue to go fine with the fed's fixes/adjustments. I don't need to have a solution to my side of the arguement. You find it going into the toilet. If something is broke, it needs fixed. What's your fix?
Originally posted by cliffw: I asked the wife, she said no, . I did good, . She was the one massively in debt when we married. I just had expenses. If half of the money which goes towards interest were spent within the general economy, that would be a fix of where the money is gonna come from. That is turn over money which stimulates like tax cuts. Not money for some rich fat cat to sit on and enslave people.
Which was my point Cliff. The only way the economy will make a turn for the better is to spend. You dont have the money to spend .. I mean dont desire to put yourself further into debt. A good majority of the american public shares that sentiment, the retail report that came out yesterday proved that. Even with slashing prices, deep discounts and 0 interest for 1 year credit cards arent spurring the people to go deeper into debt. That means the problem will deepen.
quote
It used to be a noble thing to give man credit. Now it is a business designed to make money. You always talk about giving away a dollar. Bad thinking my friend you are blocking the economy. The economy works by people producing.
Giving people money is how this economy will turn around. The economy is based on people SPENDING money not "producing" as you so eloquently alluded... so dont even go there Cliff. The problem is DEBT not production. As the indicators indicate "growth" or "production" that in no way means that the "growth" is applicable enough to halt a deepening problem of debt. You can produce all day long but if your income is insufficient then you are transferring your "production" to the CEO and the company who will lock it away in the market and out of your reach or just stuff it in his pockets and pat himself on the back for a job well done.
quote
I have not participated in this thread much. As mentioned, the money comes from production. That $7,500.00 credit limit that I am not taking is gonna get spent anyways. I will just get more for my monies and give more to those that need it. A win win situation.
People dont have the money to throw into the system so the system is starving in equal proportions to the peoples ability to feed into it. Production is related to pay. High production and paltry pay is how this problem started so the antigen is to pay people much better. and do so quicly
The machine is running out of fuel (money) and as the dollar weakens further the fuel lacks the power to drive the machine so the machine begins to sputter due to fuel starvation.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
Again I say the problem is that those in the know, those with all that education, the stock broker, bankers that made all those loans to all those people who are going bankrupt right now.
[Anna Schwartz] says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.
"They need to speak frankly to the market and acknowledge how bad the problems are, and acknowledge their own failures in letting this happen. This is what is needed to restore confidence," she told The Sunday Telegraph. "There never would have been a sub-prime mortgage crisis if the Fed had been alert. This is something Alan Greenspan must answer for," she says.
Schwartz remains defiantly lucid at 92. She still works every day at the National Bureau of Economic Research in New York, where she has toiled since 1941.
Her fame comes from a joint opus with Nobel laureate Milton Friedman: A Monetary History of the United States. It revolutionised thinking on the causes of the Great Depression when published in 1965. The book blamed the Fed for causing the slump. The bank failed to use its full bag of tricks to stop the implosion of the money stock, and turned a bust into calamity by raising rates.
"The book was a bombshell," says British monetarist Tim Congdon. "Until then almost everybody thought the free-market system itself had failed in the 1930s. What Friedman-Schwartz say was that incompetent government bureaucrats at the Fed had caused the Depression."
According to Schwartz the original sin of the Bernanke-Greenspan Fed was to hold rates at 1 per cent from 2003 to June 2004, long after the dotcom bubble was over. "It is clear that monetary policy was too accommodative. Rates of 1 per cent were bound to encourage all kinds of risky behaviour," says Schwartz.
She is scornful of Greenspan's campaign to clear his name by blaming the bubble on an Asian saving glut, which purportedly created stimulus beyond the control of the Fed by driving down global bond rates. "This attempt to exculpate himself is not convincing. The Fed failed to confront something that was evident. It can't be blamed on global events," she says.
"Liquidity doesn't do anything in this situation. It cannot deal with the underlying fear that lots of firms are going bankrupt," she says. Her view is fast spreading. Goldman Sachs issued a full-recession alert on Wednesday, predicting rates of 2.5 per cent by the third quarter. "Ben Bernanke should be making stronger statements and then backing them up with decisive easing," says Jan Hatzius, the bank's US economist.
Bernanke did indeed switch tack on Thursday. "We stand ready to take substantive additional action as needed," he says, warning of a "fragile situation". It follows a surge in December unemployment from 4.7 per cent to 5 per cent, the sharpest spike in a quarter century. Inflation fears are subsiding fast.
Bernanke insists that the Fed has leant the lesson from the catastrophic errors of the 1930s. At the late Milton Friedman's 90th birthday party, he apologised for the sins of his institutional forefathers. "Yes, we did it, we're very sorry, we won't do it again."
Originally posted by aceman: Okay Mr Bitter. We understand you have a bitterness towards education. You blame anyone with an education for the economy's faults. You find the economy now going into a depression is what you have stated in an earlier post. We've discussed this over and over. Now, if we have exhausted the discussion. We basically know everyone's position.
What's your solution? What's your thought on a fix?
Me, I find the economy is going just fine and will continue to go fine with the fed's fixes/adjustments. I don't need to have a solution to my side of the arguement. You find it going into the toilet. If something is broke, it needs fixed. What's your fix?
Ace you want an answer to the economic problems facing us today in this country. You won’t like it.
Fire all those stupid idiots who made all the mistakes that created this fiasco. From the top down. They made their money and then some off the backs of working Americans. Send the bank presidents packing, no retirement no severance, nothing. They don’t deserve to be paid for bad mistakes.
Send all the housing gains back 10 years, maybe 20. Then see just how many of these economic geniuses feel about having to loose all their windfalls they got by screwing everyone.
Lets put it this way Ace, those who told us to buy all those investments should also be canned, if you loose money because someone else told you to invest in something on the way down, can them. Same way, no retirement, no severance, nothing. Lets see how they like it.
Basically that is what they did to millions of Americans who invested in there stupidity. Now start fresh, new people, new economic advisors who have to produce or they are out also, same as any business it makes money or it fails.
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
Ace you want an answer to the economic problems facing us today in this country. You won’t like it.
Fire all those stupid idiots who made all the mistakes that created this fiasco. From the top down. They made their money and then some off the backs of working Americans. Send the bank presidents packing, no retirement no severance, nothing. They don’t deserve to be paid for bad mistakes.
Send all the housing gains back 10 years, maybe 20. Then see just how many of these economic geniuses feel about having to loose all their windfalls they got by screwing everyone.
Lets put it this way Ace, those who told us to buy all those investments should also be canned, if you loose money because someone else told you to invest in something on the way down, can them. Same way, no retirement, no severance, nothing. Lets see how they like it.
Basically that is what they did to millions of Americans who invested in there stupidity. Now start fresh, new people, new economic advisors who have to produce or they are out also, same as any business it makes money or it fails.
And you don't think people who took out mortgages for way more house than they can afford should bear any responsiblity at all? Banks made risky loans - no doubt. But doesn't the consumer have a basic responsibility to not comit themself to more debt than they can afford to pay back?
Originally posted by Formula88: And you don't think people who took out mortgages for way more house than they can afford should bear any responsiblity at all? Banks made risky loans - no doubt. But doesn't the consumer have a basic responsibility to not comit themself to more debt than they can afford to pay back?
The current situation is now that the banks are now broke due to IMPROPER LENDING PRACTICES. The fact that these people took them is Irrelavant becasue they aren't paying them back. So the problem now is who is NOW responsible for paying those loans?
The current situation is now that the banks are now broke due to IMPROPER LENDING PRACTICES. The fact that these people took them is Irrelavant becasue they aren't paying them back. So the problem now is who is NOW responsible for paying those loans?
We all are.
Why?
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
I have noting to discuss nor do I possess the desire to discuss anything with you.
My goal is not to start another round of ad-homenim or troll for it.
If you cant answer the question or discuss why it is these people cant pay their loans back or just wish to waive your hand and blame the victim for being a victim then thats fine. Just state your case while I demonstrate how the victims fell prey to a system that entrapped them.
Dont resort to ad-homenim, name call, or accuse me of trolling to avoid answering my question when all I did was ask for an answer to a question.
Why and Who has to pay their loans now that they, these people cant ?
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Oil prices fell sharply Wednesday after the government reported a surprise increase in crude supplies.
U.S. light crude for February delivery fell $2.20 to $89.62 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Oil had traded down $1.21 prior to the report's release.
Though Bush was told to go to hell when he asked the Saudi oil minster to increase production it appears that our very own producers "found some extra" just laying around and did it on their own.
Why cant they do this more often and spare the american public the added grief of extreme energy costs?
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
Originally posted by aceman: -The Bank Presidents and the CEOs were hired by a board of directors/shareholders. Not by an election of the entire U.S.
So all these shareholders who have lost money should fire their asses. No severance, no retirement, nothing.
quote
Originally posted by aceman: - The loan holders weren't FORCED to take those loans.
Ah yes but they weren’t completely informed about what these loans meant if what has happened happens.
quote
Originally posted by aceman: - The stockholders weren't forced to buy those stocks.
Ah but they were recommended by someone in the know, someone who should know if a stock is going to tank. They do have the education right? They were paying these people for their experience in their field.
Lets put it this way change the system.
If someone makes you money, then they in turn should get paid, if they loose you money then they should not get paid. Sounds fair to me.
Ever work as a salesman on commission Ace? You don’t get paid if you don’t sell.
Better yet here is an even better example.
Ever work on a piece work scale? The more you make the more you get paid, provided the product is of good quality.
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
Originally posted by 84fiero123: Ah but they were recommended by someone in the know, someone who should know if a stock is going to tank.
In most cases, nobody knows if a stock that is doing good today is going to tank or not. Investments are a gamble and are in no way black and white. All an advisor can do is make recommendations based on the current data for a company. They don't magically know if the company is going to crap out in the next year and would be in no way responsible for your loss if it did.
I believe that doing your own research before investing is a very good idea, but consulting a professional is and always will be the best thing to do.
Originally posted by aceman: Mr Bitter, whether or not a corporation decides to fire their President or CEO without severence, is not up to you or me. They are a private business.
Ah but is it up to the stockholders?
Shouldn’t they have a say in it?
Right they are a private business, so the stock holders should be able to have a say but they don’t do they?
Originally posted by ditch: I believe that doing your own research before investing is a very good idea, but consulting a professional is and always will be the best thing to do.
Ah but these professionals recommended bad stock investments even when they knew they were bad. Great example was supplied by me earlier in this thread about how the state of Maine took the advise of one of those so called pros when the stocks were headed down and then just kept going. Loosing the state Millions.
Why should they get paid if their advise is bad?
If they make money sure, if not no.
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
eep it civilized! It's ok to disagree with someone. Really, it is. But it's not ok to call someone a "toad licking monkey waxer" just because he disagrees. It'll make you actually look like one. Name-calling will most likely get you a bad rating. At the very least, it will cause the thread to end up in the Trash Can, and at its very worst it will get you banned.
Ah but these professionals recommended bad stock investments even when they knew they were bad. Great example was supplied by me earlier in this thread about how the state of Maine took the advise of one of those so called pros when the stocks were headed down and then just kept going. Loosing the state Millions.
Why should they get paid if their advise is bad?
If they make money sure, if not no.
Did you miss the word "risk"? Sure there are some dicks out there that will sell anything to make a buck, but the fact is there are plenty of good honest investment professionals that will do the best they can to get you into a healthy portfolio.
Are they supposed to know what the market is going to do in the next 2, 5, 10+ years? They're not magicians. They use the data they have on hand to make a decision. Remember, many who hold investments have had them for several years or more. Is this recent instability in the market a cause for them to go after their investment advisor who set up the account 2, 5, 10+ years ago and complain? Absolutely not.
Not everyone in the market is a day by day trader. A large chunk of investors fall into the category like myself, simply having 401k's and private mutual funds, not something they purchased last month and wanted to cash in today. So should I go after my financial planner because my mutual fund didn't do as good as I wanted it to in 2007? Hell, he set my account up 5 years ago, he should have known right?
Fact is slimy brokers DO sell stocks that are tanking. If this wasnt true then there would be no need for "anti-trust" laws and people like Martha Stewart wouldn't have been forced to vacation at club fed to design all those nifty Christmas ornaments to decorate her concrete Christmas tree.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
Originally posted by 84Bill: Fact is slimy brokers DO sell stocks that are tanking.
I don't think anyone is disputing that.
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill: If this wasnt true then there would be no need for "anti-trust" laws and people like Martha Stewart wouldn't have been forced to vacation at club fed to design all those nifty Christmas ornaments to decorate her concrete Christmas tree.
Originally posted by ditch: I don't think anyone is disputing that.
True to a degree. I see an argument that the brokers can chalk up underhanded dealings and mitigate it down to "risk" when they knew damn well they would walk away with a tidy sum of money handling the transaction. Theres nothing to stop them from this practice as their commissions are assured with the completion of the transaction they recommended to their client.
True to a degree. I see an argument that the brokers can chalk up underhanded dealings and mitigate it down to "risk" when they knew damn well they would walk away with a tidy sum of money handling the transaction. Theres nothing to stop them from this practice as their commissions are assured with the completion of the transaction they recommended to their client.
I totally agree.
Again, I want to point out that there are plenty of good honest financial advisors/brokers out there. Many people are losing money in todays market, but not all because their broker/advisor is a crook.
Again, I want to point out that there are plenty of good honest financial advisors/brokers out there. Many people are losing money in todays market, but not all because their broker/advisor is a crook.
I do agree with that assessment. There are those who feel that they provide a service and take pride in it and thats very nice to see. It is a shame to see them get whitewashed by a few underhanded snakes in the grass though.
Originally posted by 84Bill: There are those who feel that they provide a service and take pride in it and thats very nice to see. It is a shame to see them get whitewashed by a few underhanded snakes in the grass though.
amen brother
[This message has been edited by ditch (edited 01-16-2008).]
It would be nice to know that were truly the end of it. The sad fact is in desperate times such as these, those who play by the rules and don't sell and maintain performance levels will ultimately end up swallowing much of their pride to earn money for the firm.
When brokers lay off they don't lay off their top performer who tend to bend the rules of public trust.... just a bit.
Originally posted by ditch: Did you miss the word "risk"? Sure there are some dicks out there that will sell anything to make a buck, but the fact is there are plenty of good honest investment professionals that will do the best they can to get you into a healthy portfolio.
Are they supposed to know what the market is going to do in the next 2, 5, 10+ years? They're not magicians. They use the data they have on hand to make a decision. Remember, many who hold investments have had them for several years or more. Is this recent instability in the market a cause for them to go after their investment advisor who set up the account 2, 5, 10+ years ago and complain? Absolutely not.
Not everyone in the market is a day by day trader. A large chunk of investors fall into the category like myself, simply having 401k's and private mutual funds, not something they purchased last month and wanted to cash in today. So should I go after my financial planner because my mutual fund didn't do as good as I wanted it to in 2007? Hell, he set my account up 5 years ago, he should have known right?
And just how long do you think it will take these people who bought these stocks in the banks to recover their losses?
What about those who invested their retirement funds in these banks that said yes we are in fine shape and the next day posted 46% losses?
Mortgage meltdown: Now the rents More fallout from the current housing slump - the cost of renting a home stagnagted in 2007, according to an exclusive report for CNNMoney.
Yet another domino set to tip.
I never considered the fact that when housing prices fall renters who have mortgages normally don't ask for much more than the value of the mortgage on the property they are renting.
I've already seen a few "rotations" of renters in my neighborhood alone some of which were gone by dawn types. I cant help but to think how the owner will be able to pay the mortgage on a tenant that has either skipped out or cant make the rent payment.
Originally posted by 84fiero123: And just how long do you think it will take these people who bought these stocks in the banks to recover their losses?
I thought we were discussing where to lay blame, not the recovery part. Of course, I don't mind giving an opinion on that too, but lets finish the part about who is to blame first:
quote
Originally posted by 84fiero123: What about those who invested their retirement funds in these banks that said yes we are in fine shape and the next day posted 46% losses?
so now it's the banks themselves that said everything is ok, buy our stock? I thought we were hanging the advisors/brokers today?
and who moved their entire retirement portfolio into one of the big banks and lost 46%? any links to that? Only a fool would move their entire retirement fund into a small group of stocks. Enron is a perfect example of why people should be diversified.
Also, most people can and do move their retirement funds around themselves, it's all electronic and very easy to do anymore. So when they move it and lose who do we blame?
[This message has been edited by ditch (edited 01-16-2008).]
Originally posted by ditch: Only a fool would move their entire retirement fund into a small group of stocks.
Only a fool would buy into an ARM mortgage too but millions of people did and now look at what has happened.
While the mortgage scandal appears to be the work of greedy underhanded salesmen just trying to punch out mortgages, I hold the banks and their lending "practices" responsible for creating a better mouse trap then killing us all by "knocking" off too much dead weight later on. I believe the banks were blind sided by the energy price increases and didn't factor into their ARM "scam" anything other than normal inflationary "growth."
Almost 4 months and a few trillion dollars later they are realizing the error in their ways. This is why I personally don't trust banks with so much as a penny of my hard earned cash.
Interestingly enough I have not heard word one that the banks could be guilty of anti-trust by lowering their lending standards or creating traps they knew had an elevated risk of failure the further down the economic scale you go.
Seems a one sided ball game when you give a higher interest rate or an elevated rate that is adjustable (will only go up and not down) to the guy who can already ill afford it and a lower one to the guy who has a back pack full of WAM. Thats not what I would consider "risk management" as it is more akin to "disaster recipe."
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
Only a fool would buy into an ARM mortgage too but millions of people did and now look at what has happened.
I put the blame evenly on both the banks and homeowners concernning the ARM issue. As far as who is to blame for investors losing money in the market, that one is harder to dissect. I think everyone has made their opinion known on who they want to blame for the issues were facing, ARM, banks, etc. So where do we go from here?
I'm far from an economist, it isn't even remotely my specialty, but I wouldn't mind discussing that...Where do we go from here? I just got home and need to get situated. Need a cold beer, have to cook some food, need to unwind my mind. I'll be back to give my thoughts (if I can come up with any) after that
[This message has been edited by ditch (edited 01-16-2008).]
Clinton administration, almost all the republicans, and Greenspan Sorry but the banks were following the new laws that "they" made. Before the change the saving and loans were not allowed to have holdings in the stock market, which caused more problems when the loan failure rate went up. But we cannot forget the F'ing stupid people that bought arm loans leading the pack.
Originally posted by ditch: I put the blame evenly on both the banks and homeowners concernning the ARM issue.
Might as well blame hungry people for eating food then. Food, clothing and shelter are the basic necessities of life so if a bank can rustle up some scheme to take advantage of peoples needs to get out of the elements and grab a slice of the American dream called home, then the degradation of trust between the banks, government and people has degraded significantly.
quote
As far as who is to blame for investors losing money in the market, that one is harder to dissect. I think everyone has made their opinion known on who they want to blame for the issues were facing, ARM, banks, etc. So where do we go from here?
I'm far from an economist, it isn't even remotely my specialty, but I wouldn't mind discussing that...Where do we go from here? I just got home and need to get situated. Need a cold beer, have to cook some food, need to unwind my mind. I'll be back to give my thoughts (if I can come up with any) after that
Are you even interested to know that thousands of Americans are no longer enjoying that walk through the door of their home, enjoying a beer or two while they unwind because the banks and brokers sold them a bad bill of goods?
Where we go from here is directly proportional to your position on weather or not these banks and brokers should be held accountable for violating the trust of the American public..
These banks don't give a fuk.. When they need a few billion in money they just tap the Fed and out pours billions... The people are the ones who are paying for this bullcrap.. you, me, mr defaulted ARM mortgage, At&T, Time Warner...
The fed is handing out billions of our money to these scam artists and calling it a "bail out"
Fuk the banks.. make the banks pay.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
The fed is handing out billions of our money to these scam artists and calling it a "bail out"
Fuk the banks.. make the banks pay.
Hmmmm, I guess you do not realize that those billions are in the form of loans and are made available at lower interest rates to make CASH available for US to borrow. Sorry but that is not handing out and the interest lock is also NOT a bailout. This is just one of the many reasons your position does not make the grade. It takes at least a basic understanding. Like growth.
Originally posted by Red88FF: Hmmmm, I guess you do not realize that those billions are in the form of loans and are made available at lower interest rates to make CASH available for US to borrow. Sorry but that is not handing out and the interest lock is also NOT a bailout. This is just one of the many reasons your position does not make the grade. It takes at least a basic understanding. Like growth.
Dont assume what I realize and what I don't.
When a mortgage broker says "trust me" with this loan you can get this house, THAT IS a violation of public trust when the loan falls through because the bank "crossed the line" and gave it. The bank APPROVED the loan so the bank should be made to eat the losses, not get a hand out to the tune of a few hundred billion in tax payers dollars.
The banks knew what they were doing when they relaxed their loan practices and handed out billions and billions of dollars in junk mortgages.
I could see it as not being an issue if this were an isolated case but the fact is MILLIONS of Americans were lead to believe this mortgage was the best thing since sliced bread and it appears that the banks were the ones who were responsible for scamming the American public on a wholesale level judging by the sheer magnitude of this crisis. Those on the street cant be helped at this point as their house is gone so there is no need for the banks to get these fed "loans" other than to maintain their bloated stock values.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
Originally posted by 84Bill: Are you even interested to know that thousands of Americans are no longer enjoying that walk through the door of their home, enjoying a beer or two while they unwind because the banks and brokers sold them a bad bill of goods?
Get over yourself, of course I know that. It sounds like you think I don't give a rats ass...I do. So am I not allowed to enjoy what I have? I walked thru my door today because I understood the terms of my mortgage contract and knew it was within my means to repay it.
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill: Where we go from here is directly proportional to your position on weather or not these banks and brokers should be held accountable for violating the trust of the American public..
I made my position clear, the blame does not rest with just one entity. Did banks do the wrong thing? Yes, and they should have to pay for some of that. Don't think for a minute that I like it when the fed pumps money their way, I don't. Did the home owners do the wrong thing? Yes, and many are paying for it by losing the homes they couldn't afford in the first place.
Where do we go? On the ARM issue: More strict lending standards, helping people who have ARM's and decent credit get into a fixed rate mortgage. Economy in general: Another interrest rate cut? Most likely will happen. Get CNN to report some good news (there is plenty of it out there) instead of trying to destroy consumer confidence with nothing but negatives. Peoples attitudes play a tremendous part in is.
Originally posted by ditch: So am I not allowed to enjoy what I have? I walked thru my door today because I understood the terms of my mortgage contract and knew it was within my means to repay it.
Never even said any of that at all... You implied it and I just brought it out into the open for discussion.
You me and everyone else needs to grapple with is the fact that our economy is in a state of shock because of bad lending practices. The people were given the option of taking a slice of the American dream by signing here or being denied it. The people wont deny themselves a house, only the bank can do that so when a bank says congratulations on the purchase of your new house, they SHOULD have a vested interest in making sure the product they sold is something slightly more reliable that a set of Mexican handcuffs.
quote
Yes, and many are paying for it by losing the homes they couldn't afford in the first place.
No.. WE are paying for it because the banks APPROVED those loans which means the banks had the LAST SAY before giving out that loan.
Because the banks gave out so many junk loans to so many people when they shouldn't have and CAUSED the mortgage crisis we are now dealing with... and it's associate evils like a deflated dollar and out of control inflation...I'm sorry to say that this isnt something that you can lay blame on the people for doing.
The people just took an offer that the banks gave them. That offer was a baited offer and that bait was but is no longer called the American Dream for them. It was snatched out from under them like the cheap throw rug that it was to begin with.
quote
Where do we go? On the ARM issue: More strict lending standards, helping people who have ARM's and decent credit get into a fixed rate mortgage. Economy in general: Another interest rate cut? Most likely will happen. Get CNN to report some good news (there is plenty of it out there) instead of trying to destroy consumer confidence with nothing but negatives. Peoples attitudes play a tremendous part in is.
If enough people already lost enough houses and those that remain are in bad shape then I don't care how many you convert to fixed rate mortgages because that wont solve the problem of a faltering economy due to mortgage crisis. Adding to it by devaluing the doller will only amplify the effects.
Those who lost their houses also lost their ability to buy on credit.. The wind comes off the economic sails...
Tightening up lending practices AFTER the fact isn't going to help as it will put others out of reach of obtaining more credit until the crisis is over.... Yet more wind coming off the economic sails...
Give the crooks more Fed money and cause the dollar to deflate means... Even more wind comes out of the economic sails...
It gets to the point where people cant buy during the biggest sales month of the year and EVEN MORE wind comes off the economic sails...
When only 17,000 jobs were created in the month of December?.... I dont even think I need to say it.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 01-16-2008).]
. I did good, 
. She was the one massively in debt when we married. I just had expenses. If half of the money which goes towards interest were spent within the general economy, that would be a fix of where the money is gonna come from. That is turn over money which stimulates like tax cuts. Not money for some rich fat cat to sit on and enslave people.
