In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.

Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.

Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

That is unarmed robbery, not socialism. Socialism is workers' rights
and universal health care that works more efficiently, etc.

In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.

Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

That is unarmed robbery, not socialism. Socialism is workers' rights
and universal health care that works more efficiently, etc.

So you think taxpayers dollars being given to private debt holders to
prop up loans so that people are in houses they can't afford is not
socialism? Now we know where you stand as a proud Democrap. Go
vote for O-bla-ma.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.
Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

That is unarmed robbery, not socialism. Socialism is workers' rights
and universal health care that works more efficiently, etc.

So you think taxpayers dollars being given to private debt holders to
prop up loans so that people are in houses they can't afford is not
socialism? Now we know where you stand as a proud Democrap. Go
vote for O-bla-ma.

I think that's a side issue, not the main point. The main point is that
the derivatives house-of-cards collapsed. The banks had their necks way
out (risk = reward) and they got them chopped off.

This bailout is way bigger than putting a temporary moratorium on
evictions and trying to preserve assets. If people are in the houses
the houses are worth more. They pay property taxes. The taxes buy
police cars. Think it through. I doubt that's Paulsen's first concern
however.

I'm almost certain I will not be voting for Senator Obama. Bob Barr or
Cynthia McKinney.

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.

Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

--

Corporate welfare is not socialism. It's the dictionary definition of
fascism.

In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.
Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

That is unarmed robbery, not socialism. Socialism is workers' rights
and universal health care that works more efficiently, etc.

So you think taxpayers dollars being given to private debt holders to
prop up loans so that people are in houses they can't afford is not
socialism? Now we know where you stand as a proud Democrap. Go
vote for O-bla-ma.

I think that's a side issue, not the main point. The main point is that
the derivatives house-of-cards collapsed. The banks had their necks way
out (risk = reward) and they got them chopped off.

For the last time. The problem was created by Fanny-may and Freddy-mac.
They originated the majority of the bad debt. Then they packaged them
together. Then the private banks bought up the toxic debt not knowing
the extent of the risk in the mortgages they bought. Then that debt was
repackage and resold. The private institutions did not know the extent
of their exposure when they were repackaged and resold. I almost
started buying this stuff myself but backed off when I discovered that
the equity/insurance/risk was too nebulous for my taste. I'm pretty
conservative and I want to know my exposure. Anyone that bought this
stuff was screwed by the coverup that the original lenders in collusion
with congress perpetrated. This was fraud plain and simple and the banks
that bought it were the marks. Then congress and Bush decided to make
it a taxpayer problem. That effectively socialized the bad debt.

The Democraps are the winners here Game/set/match and we taxpayer lose
bigtime.

This bailout is way bigger than putting a temporary moratorium on
evictions and trying to preserve assets. If people are in the houses
the houses are worth more. They pay property taxes. The taxes buy
police cars. Think it through. I doubt that's Paulsen's first concern
however.

You think it through. The market is in decline. The bad mortgages are
more than the housing capital that is supposed to back it up. This is
no problem if people that own that debt keep paying but people that
never should have gotten the loans to begin with are walking away from
houses that are worth less than what they owe on it. That is called
foreclosure and it is going to eat us up.

Can you see what happened here? The Fed kept rates low for years and
the Democraps in charge of the quasi-governmental lending institutions
played fast and loose with the lending rules. This led to an overheated
housing market fueled by false demand inflating prices.

The market is not going to come back for a long, long time.

The housing train has run out of steam and whoever owned the bad
mortgages was left holding the empty bag. Now you an I own it and we
are going to keep paying and paying and paying even though we did
nothing wrong. We are not going to get our money back. We are screwed.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.

Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

--

Corporate welfare is not socialism. It's the dictionary definition of
fascism.

It is socialism when we owe it. I'm an innocent bystander so why should
I be paying for other peoples housing through my taxes.

The difference between you and I is that I know when I'm being screwed.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Corporate welfare is not socialism. It's the dictionary definition of
fascism.

It is socialism when we owe it. I'm an innocent bystander so why should
I be paying for other peoples housing through my taxes.

The difference between you and I is that I know when I'm being screwed.


Oh, I know full well when I'm being screwed. I just prefer to know by whom
and for what reason. We have the government and the system that we allowed
to happen. Each of us is responsible in our own way for the situation. There
is no easy solution, there may not even be a solution at all. But we all, to
a man, have to deal with it as best we can. Knowing from whence the hammer
fell is a good first step.

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Corporate welfare is not socialism. It's the dictionary definition of
fascism.

It is socialism when we owe it. I'm an innocent bystander so why should
I be paying for other peoples housing through my taxes.

The difference between you and I is that I know when I'm being screwed.


Oh, I know full well when I'm being screwed. I just prefer to know by whom
and for what reason.

The Democraps.

The Dem's wet dream having you and I pay for housing the working poor
can't otherwise afford.

We have the government and the system that we allowed to happen. Each
of us is responsible in our own way for the situation. There is no
easy solution, there may not even be a solution at all. But we all,
to a man, have to deal with it as best we can. Knowing from whence
the hammer fell is a good first step.

Baloney, this was fraud plain and simple. Nobody signed up for this.
Barney and his congress-mates on the banking and fiance committee along
with the officers of Fanny-may and Freddy-mac belong in jail.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article , Dave
wrote:

Telamon wrote:

This is their way of realizing their dream of
socialism and Bush played right into their hands with the bailout. This
is ground zero of the problem. This is where it began.

Let me tell you what you just witnessed. The middle class in this
country was just saddled with the debt of putting the poor into housing
they can not afford. The people running the country just became more
powerful and their rich friends just got richer. The price was that
middle class people just lost some economic freedom and a BIG CHUNK of
money.

I don't think there's anything resembling socialism at work here.
Yeah, where did I go wrong thinking that? 700,000,000,000 dollars is a
drop in the bucket. Nothing to see here people, move along now.

That is unarmed robbery, not socialism. Socialism is workers' rights
and universal health care that works more efficiently, etc.
So you think taxpayers dollars being given to private debt holders to
prop up loans so that people are in houses they can't afford is not
socialism? Now we know where you stand as a proud Democrap. Go
vote for O-bla-ma.

I think that's a side issue, not the main point. The main point is that
the derivatives house-of-cards collapsed. The banks had their necks way
out (risk = reward) and they got them chopped off.

For the last time. The problem was created by Fanny-may and Freddy-mac.
They originated the majority of the bad debt. Then they packaged them
together. Then the private banks bought up the toxic debt not knowing
the extent of the risk in the mortgages they bought.

There were problems with some mortgages, which the oinkers used as a
smokescreen to run amok. If it were just some defaulted mortgages we
wouldn't be in such bad shape. There were 10 times the foreclosures in
the Great Depression.


Then that debt was
repackage and resold. The private institutions did not know the extent
of their exposure when they were repackaged and resold.

There are debt rating institutions who got some 'splainin' to do.


Can you see what happened here? The Fed kept rates low for years and
the Democraps in charge of the quasi-governmental lending institutions
played fast and loose with the lending rules. This led to an overheated
housing market fueled by false demand inflating prices.

You really need to give respect to get it.

The Democrats have not been in charge of anything except the house of
Representatives, and that only since 2007. Mr. Bush can be heard on
electronic recording saying he wanted to put minorities into houses they
really couldn't afford; in 2002. Fabulous new program. I'm sure you
can find Democrats touting this as well. But, that is the catalyst, not
the core issue.

"Forewarning: I work in the financial industry, and am partial to fiscal
conservatism. However, I hate being lied to, and I don't exactly have a
soft spot in my heart for liars - especially those who work in or around
my field of business. Proving my honesty to the general public is
difficult enough as it is, without partisan clowns and snake-oil
salesmen tilting the odds against me. So thanks very much, James
Taranto. You just goaded me - a fiscal conservative - into posting my
first DailyKos diary.

....Gramm-Leach-Bliley effectively removed this restriction, allowing a
single institution to both create a debt-based investment, and then
facilitate its sale. Previously, with two institutions involved in that
process (Three if you count the investment rating company - Moody's for
example), there would have to be a high degree of clarity involved. One
institution (Investment bank) wouldn't just buy, repackage, and re-sell
another institution's (Retail bank) products without first understanding
exactly what it was. It would also be far less likely to hold those
assets and count them as capital..."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9...08/1013/601053

The market is not going to come back for a long, long time.

The housing train has run out of steam and whoever owned the bad
mortgages was left holding the empty bag. Now you an I own it and we
are going to keep paying and paying and paying even though we did
nothing wrong.

I have a feeling we'll be housing a lot of Iraqi refugees in them.