• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Kola, Oldtimer and Bullhauler can you explain this

Tam

Well-known member
1. If the US is doing as good as you seem to think under Obama why is more than 1 in every 5 Americans homeowners considered underwater with their mortgages?
Forget what Oldtimer says about Valley County Montana where the Bakken Reserve is causing a boom, we are talking about the REST OF THE US. :wink:
Underwater Homeowners Will Work For Lower Pay
By Karen Weise on December 31, 2012

More than one in five borrowers have underwater mortgage loans—they owe more than their homes are worth. This causes financial stress and emotional pain, but new research shows that underwater mortgages may also cause homeowners to work for less money. In a working paper from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, researchers Chris Cunningham and Robert Reed found that all things being equal, having an underwater mortgage causes a 5 percent to 9 percent decline in real wages.


2.Why is 1 in 6 Americans worry about where their next paycheck is coming from? Again we are not talking about Valley County Montana where the Bakken Reserve is causing a boom, we are talking about the REST OF THE US where
US Unemployment Rate: 7.80% for Dec 2012
US Unemployment Rate is at 7.80%, compared to 7.80% last month and 8.50% last year. This is higher than the long term average of 5.80%.
I wonder if this unemployment rate is why Harry Reid's son Rory works for a Chinese solar plant? :?


3.Why is Washington DC now considered the richest city in the US bypassing Silicon Valley? It is even richer than all those cities in Texas where the big greedy oil companies reside so why is a GOVERNMENT CITY richer than any city built by the private sector?

While you ponder the version of personal attack you will use on me to distract the topic I will tell you what I think. :wink:

1. It is because people bought homes way over what they could afford and when the economy collapsed under the weight of Barney Franks, their got caught. They are still underwater as the Dems promised all kinds of bailouts and their bandaids only held in the poison and infected the whole system. So now not only are they underwater but according to this study they are getting paid less to cover their expenses and mortgages. That is if they even have a job.

Which brings me to the Unemployment rate of 7.8% due to all the money Obama spent. Just how many dollars did he spent creating jobs with his Jeffery Imelt headed Jobs Counsel to RAISE THE LONG TERM UNEMPLOYMENT RATE BY 2 FULL PERCENTAGE POINTS? Just think of what the rate could have been if Obama would not have cut all those jobs dealing with offshore drilling or all those jobs building a certain pipeline or maybe OKing a few drilling permits on Federal owned land? :? And gee just think of it, those jobs would not have been government tax payer funded jobs they would have been TAX PAYING JOBS. :eek:

And the final question, Washington DC, a GOVERNMENT CITY, is now the riches city in the US because of all that Lobbyist money buying off politicians to get their hands on your hard earned tax dollars. It has surpassed all other cities because politians keep upping your taxes to keep the lobbyists paying for their private lifestyles. I heard today GE spends over $100,000 per day lobbying Washington. We know Imelt's campaign donations bought him a chairmenship of the Jobs Counsel, so I have to wonder what $100,000 PER DAY buys him, while he PAID NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX because he banks his GE profits in an offshore bank to avoid the Dems continuing tax hikes. Flying a chef in from Chicago to make you a pizza costs a lot of dough, as does the finest booze available and flying to Hawaii on separate jets for a family holiday.

Now that I have had my rant as Bullhauler would call it, :wink: Can any of you explain the housing stats, unemployment rate and the wealth of DC? OR will this thread be distracted with typical liberal tactics so you don't have to explain why you think the US is better off under Obama?
 

Bullhauler

Well-known member
Well the housing one is easy. Two many Americans were damned fools and paid three times what they should have for a house. Then they whine when it is worth less than they paid for it. If Americans would look at a house as a place to live instead of as an investment they would be better off. Every farmer knows that when he builds a house on his farm it loses 50% of its value or more the day he moves in. But he doesn't care because he is never going to sell his house anyway.

There are too many types like okfarmer that whine that his house is worth less then it was a few years ago. I doubt if anybody made him pay too much. If you are under water on your house too damned bad. Next time pay more money down and don't get too much house for your needs. Anyone that took a simple high school business class should have known that no principle mortgages were a bad idea but thousands of Americans signed up for them.

Then you get unemployment numbers. Everywhere I go I run into too many types that I wonder how in the hell this guy has a job. It looks to me like unemployment should be alot higher than it is. Maybe then more people would appreciate the fact that they have a job and would actually give their employer a decent days work. Then you get all of the deadbeat dad types that have a job under the table to avoid paying child support but they are still counted as unemployed. You also have the worthless ones that lose a job and don't look for work until unemployment runs out.
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Bullhauler said:
Well the housing one is easy. Two many Americans were damned fools and paid three times what they should have for a house. Then they whine when it is worth less than they paid for it. If Americans would look at a house as a place to live instead of as an investment they would be better off. Every farmer knows that when he builds a house on his farm it loses 50% of its value or more the day he moves in. But he doesn't care because he is never going to sell his house anyway.

There are too many types like okfarmer that whine that his house is worth less then it was a few years ago. I doubt if anybody made him pay too much. If you are under water on your house too damned bad. Next time pay more money down and don't get too much house for your needs. Anyone that took a simple high school business class should have known that no principle mortgages were a bad idea but thousands of Americans signed up for them.

Then you get unemployment numbers. Everywhere I go I run into too many types that I wonder how in the hell this guy has a job. It looks to me like unemployment should be alot higher than it is. Maybe then more people would appreciate the fact that they have a job and would actually give their employer a decent days work. Then you get all of the deadbeat dad types that have a job under the table to avoid paying child support but they are still counted as unemployed. You also have the worthless ones that lose a job and don't look for work until unemployment runs out.

Okay big boy, since you know so much.... tell me how much I'm under water? And while you're at it, how much did I spend on it?

I'll even give you a hint. I make more a year than my house costs, so am I overspending?

You make a lot of assumptions but you really shouldn't. I could make you look real dumb in every one of them, especially as to why I live where I do.

Plus, I thought we weren't talking :wink:
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Bullhauler said:
Well the housing one is easy. Two many Americans were damned fools and paid three times what they should have for a house. Then they whine when it is worth less than they paid for it. If Americans would look at a house as a place to live instead of as an investment they would be better off. Every farmer knows that when he builds a house on his farm it loses 50% of its value or more the day he moves in. But he doesn't care because he is never going to sell his house anyway.

There are too many types like okfarmer that whine that his house is worth less then it was a few years ago. I doubt if anybody made him pay too much. If you are under water on your house too damned bad. Next time pay more money down and don't get too much house for your needs. Anyone that took a simple high school business class should have known that no principle mortgages were a bad idea but thousands of Americans signed up for them.

Then you get unemployment numbers. Everywhere I go I run into too many types that I wonder how in the hell this guy has a job. It looks to me like unemployment should be alot higher than it is. Maybe then more people would appreciate the fact that they have a job and would actually give their employer a decent days work. Then you get all of the deadbeat dad types that have a job under the table to avoid paying child support but they are still counted as unemployed. You also have the worthless ones that lose a job and don't look for work until unemployment runs out.

It was the Democratic party that made "signing up to buy a house" way too easy. Yes, anyone that took a high school business class should be aware of the pitfalls of trying to buy too much on credit. Unfortunately, the politicians in trying to buy votes allowed this to happen, and in fact, highly promoted it. Whoever promises the most freebies gets the most votes. You, being such an intelligent scholar of how the world operates, should be well aware of this. How else do you think Obama got re-elected?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Soapweed said:
Bullhauler said:
Well the housing one is easy. Two many Americans were damned fools and paid three times what they should have for a house. Then they whine when it is worth less than they paid for it. If Americans would look at a house as a place to live instead of as an investment they would be better off. Every farmer knows that when he builds a house on his farm it loses 50% of its value or more the day he moves in. But he doesn't care because he is never going to sell his house anyway.

There are too many types like okfarmer that whine that his house is worth less then it was a few years ago. I doubt if anybody made him pay too much. If you are under water on your house too damned bad. Next time pay more money down and don't get too much house for your needs. Anyone that took a simple high school business class should have known that no principle mortgages were a bad idea but thousands of Americans signed up for them.

Then you get unemployment numbers. Everywhere I go I run into too many types that I wonder how in the hell this guy has a job. It looks to me like unemployment should be alot higher than it is. Maybe then more people would appreciate the fact that they have a job and would actually give their employer a decent days work. Then you get all of the deadbeat dad types that have a job under the table to avoid paying child support but they are still counted as unemployed. You also have the worthless ones that lose a job and don't look for work until unemployment runs out.

It was the Democratic party that made "signing up to buy a house" way too easy. Yes, anyone that took a high school business class should be aware of the pitfalls of trying to buy too much on credit. Unfortunately, the politicians in trying to buy votes allowed this to happen, and in fact, highly promoted it. Whoever promises the most freebies gets the most votes. You, being such an intelligent scholar of how the world operates, should be well aware of this. How else do you think Obama got re-elected?

Actually both parties did it- bigtime during both Clintons and Bush's terms...Giving everyone the chance for the American Dream of owning a home...GW trying to get the Mexican vote and go down in history as a friend to Latinos- so he took away rules like even checking if a person had a job- or if they were American citizens...Other rulechanges giving lending companies the ability to "bundle and sell " their notes while still making money servicing them removed all the banks skin in the game so they could care little about making sure it was a good loan or not...The Brokers handling it were getting rich- so they could care little if the mortgage went down the drain...
Nope this is a bipartisan screwup...
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Soapweed said:
Bullhauler said:
Well the housing one is easy. Two many Americans were damned fools and paid three times what they should have for a house. Then they whine when it is worth less than they paid for it. If Americans would look at a house as a place to live instead of as an investment they would be better off. Every farmer knows that when he builds a house on his farm it loses 50% of its value or more the day he moves in. But he doesn't care because he is never going to sell his house anyway.

There are too many types like okfarmer that whine that his house is worth less then it was a few years ago. I doubt if anybody made him pay too much. If you are under water on your house too damned bad. Next time pay more money down and don't get too much house for your needs. Anyone that took a simple high school business class should have known that no principle mortgages were a bad idea but thousands of Americans signed up for them.

Then you get unemployment numbers. Everywhere I go I run into too many types that I wonder how in the hell this guy has a job. It looks to me like unemployment should be alot higher than it is. Maybe then more people would appreciate the fact that they have a job and would actually give their employer a decent days work. Then you get all of the deadbeat dad types that have a job under the table to avoid paying child support but they are still counted as unemployed. You also have the worthless ones that lose a job and don't look for work until unemployment runs out.

It was the Democratic party that made "signing up to buy a house" way too easy. Yes, anyone that took a high school business class should be aware of the pitfalls of trying to buy too much on credit. Unfortunately, the politicians in trying to buy votes allowed this to happen, and in fact, highly promoted it. Whoever promises the most freebies gets the most votes. You, being such an intelligent scholar of how the world operates, should be well aware of this. How else do you think Obama got re-elected?

Actually both parties did it- bigtime during both Clintons and Bush's terms...Giving everyone the chance for the American Dream of owning a home...GW trying to get the Mexican vote and go down in history as a friend to Latinos- so he took away rules like even checking if a person had a job- or if they were American citizens...Other rulechanges giving lending companies the ability to "bundle and sell " their notes while still making money servicing them removed all the banks skin in the game so they could care little about making sure it was a good loan or not...The Brokers handling it were getting rich- so they could care little if the mortgage went down the drain...
Nope this is a bipartisan screwup...
Barack Obama played a leading role in the mortgage crisis of 2008 that sunk the US economy.

In his early activist days, Barack Obama the community organizer sued banks to ease lending practices.

State Sen. Barack Obama and crackpot priest Michael Pfleger led a protest in Chicago in January 2000. (NBC 5 Week of January 3, 2000)

In 1994, Barack Obama was one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. The lawsuit forced the bank to ease its lending practices.
The Daily Caller reported:

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.

Then there’s Bush…
On the flip side, President George W. Bush warned the Democratic Congress 17 times in 2008 alone about the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.

To this day Barack Obama blames Bush for the 2008 economic meltdown.
The truth is, it was Obama not Bush who destroyed the economy.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
.Other rulechanges giving lending companies the ability to "bundle and sell " their notes while still making money servicing them removed all the banks skin in the game so they could care little about making sure it was a good loan or not...The Brokers handling it were getting rich- so they could care little if the mortgage went down the drain...
Nope this is a bipartisan screwup...

You need to learn about this if you plan to discuss it. Loans have been bundled and sold for ages. It's not something new. Where do you think mortgage backed securities come from?? Banks bundle loans, FNMA, FHLMC and others purchase them. The seller of the "bundle" is still responsible for collecting payments, remitting the payments to the purchaser, doing collections and foreclosures IF it goes to foreclosure. There is seldom a broker involved in any part of it. It can all be done in house. The secondary lenders then sell the notes again as mortgage backed securities and are responsible for remitting payments to the owners of the security.. Depending on the remaining term of the loans, and net yields the loans may often be sold at a discount to the secondary market so there is MUCH to be lost if the loan goes into default. Oh and by the way, servicing fee to the originator of the loans who bundled them and sold them is usually 3/8 of 1% unless it has changed.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Heres how the bundling of subprime loans becomes not only a roulette wheel but a license to steal for some...
And its never the little guy that comes out on top...

http://www.theurbanpolitico.com/2011/07/bundling-of-subprime-loans-by-asset.html
 

Mike

Well-known member
Greenspan told them to get "Creative".....................................
*Alan Greenspan promoted the stock market bubble that collapsed in 2000, and created the housing bubble that collapsed in 2006. [6]

*Alan Greenspan opposed the effort to regulate the mortgage industry and prevent the fraudulent lending practices that led to the current economic crisis. [7]

* Alan Greenspan encouraged creative mortgage financing, sub-prime mortgage lending, and the use of adjustable rate mortgages. [8]

* Alan Greenspan understands the danger of fiat money and the importance of having a gold-backed currency, yet he expanded the money supply and promoted the inflationary spiral that is undermining the U.S. economy today. [9]
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Greenspan told them to get "Creative".........................................

He's definitely one of the major players in the list of villains ...
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
TexasBred said:
Oldtimer said:
.Other rulechanges giving lending companies the ability to "bundle and sell " their notes while still making money servicing them removed all the banks skin in the game so they could care little about making sure it was a good loan or not...The Brokers handling it were getting rich- so they could care little if the mortgage went down the drain...
Nope this is a bipartisan screwup...

You need to learn about this if you plan to discuss it.

:lol: When did that ever stop him from impressing us with his vast knowledge of........well........of everything. :roll:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Heres how the bundling of subprime loans becomes not only a roulette wheel but a license to steal for some...
And its never the little guy that comes out on top...

http://www.theurbanpolitico.com/2011/07/bundling-of-subprime-loans-by-asset.html


ARM's are tied to indexes stated in the closing documents. ALL know what can happen and it is dictated by the movement of the index, not an unscrupulous banker. BTW, if Suzy can't make a $2400 payment there is probably less than a 1% chance she can make a $2200 payment. And not all loans were subprime especially one with a 20% or 40% down payment.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
I'm with Bull Hauler on this deal.


And lord have mercy, Soap is there anything you don't blame the Democrats for???


:roll:

Is there anything you don't give the leftwingernut teabagee dems a free pass on
Just one?, thought so
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Larrry said:
kolanuraven said:
I'm with Bull Hauler on this deal.


And lord have mercy, Soap is there anything you don't blame the Democrats for???


:roll:

Is there anything you don't give the leftwingernut teabagee dems a free pass on
Just one?, thought so


There is a lot on both sides that I like and do not like also.

I don't keep my nose run up the ass of just one party.

I have a brain and can think on my own.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Larrry said:
kolanuraven said:
I'm with Bull Hauler on this deal.


And lord have mercy, Soap is there anything you don't blame the Democrats for???


:roll:

Is there anything you don't give the leftwingernut teabagee dems a free pass on
Just one?, thought so


There is a lot on both sides that I like and do not like also.

I don't keep my nose run up the ass of just one party.

I have a brain and can think on my own.

Yea but you never use it :D :D :D
 

Larrry

Well-known member
You answered just like I knew you would. You didn't name a single leftwingernut teabagee dem obama regime thing where you condemned them,

Your answer was "the all do it" that is so teabageeish
 
Top