The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Economics => Topic started by: thundley4 on June 25, 2008, 09:29:50 AM
-
Can someone help here? If this right, doesn't that amount to $750,000 per each homeowner?
The legislation would create a $300 billion fund to help up to 400,000 troubled homeowners refinance costly, exotic mortgages into more affordable, government-backed loans. It easily cleared a Senate test vote by an 83-9 vote on Tuesday
-
Linky???
-
Ooops.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2328043420080624?rpc=92
-
Ahh, we'll just keep printing money. No harm in that, right? :uhsure:
-
The legislation would create a $300 billion fund to help up to 400,000 troubled homeowners refinance costly, exotic mortgages into more affordable, government-backed loans. It easily cleared a Senate test vote by an 83-9 vote on Tuesday.
The bill is opposed by the White House but supported by Democrats and many Republicans. It would also overhaul regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored enterprises that are the largest U.S. mortgage financing companies.
If the Senate approves it, the bill would have to be reconciled with a similar measure already passed by the House of Representatives. Lawmakers hope to send a final package to President George W. Bush by mid-July.
The two main Democratic authors of the legislation, Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank and Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd, met face-to-face on Tuesday.
WTF!!!!! So Sen. Christopher "Friend of Angelo" Dodd (D-CT)???? Unreal....
I don't know how the money would be applied. I'll have to read more...
-
a little bit more -
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/24/300-million-mortgage-bailout-steams-ahead-in-senate-83-9/
-
Can someone help here? If this right, doesn't that amount to $750,000 per each homeowner?
The legislation would create a $300 billion fund to help up to 400,000 troubled homeowners refinance costly, exotic mortgages into more affordable, government-backed loans. It easily cleared a Senate test vote by an 83-9 vote on Tuesday
Bad, bad, idea.
-
Of course the fact that Sen. Dodd received a VIP loan from Countrywide has no bearing on this. :banghead:
This is not about helping the homeowners, most will still lose their homes, and have their credit ratings damaged, but it will sure help with the lenders bottom lines.
-
What's wrong with the people who took out loans they couldn't afford just dealing with consequences??? Either that or every fracking person who holds a mortgage should get a free year without paoying. At least make it equal acroos the board, so those of us who do things the right way don't get screwed (again!)!!
-
Can someone help here? If this right, doesn't that amount to $750,000 per each homeowner?
The legislation would create a $300 billion fund to help up to 400,000 troubled homeowners refinance costly, exotic mortgages into more affordable, government-backed loans. It easily cleared a Senate test vote by an 83-9 vote on Tuesday
there is MUCH more than just the loans and thats not counting the burocracy to administer them (which will never go away). there is always pork hanging on any bill. this one is no exception. I don't recall the specifics but it will come out more.
-
What's wrong with the people who took out loans they couldn't afford just dealing with consequences??? Either that or every fracking person who holds a mortgage should get a free year without paoying. At least make it equal acroos the board, so those of us who do things the right way don't get screwed (again!)!!
this has little to do with borrowers, its to bail out the lenders.
-
this has little to do with borrowers, its to bail out the lenders.
I'd say it's about both, but I'm not going to get into it with anyone. It's buying votes and bailing at the same time.
Citibank is probably going to fold. Wells Fargo isn't far behind.
.
-
this has little to do with borrowers, its to bail out the lenders.
I'd say it's about both, but I'm not going to get into it with anyone. It's buying votes and bailing at the same time.
Citibank is probably going to fold. Wells Fargo isn't far behind.
.
no argument with the vote buying
it might be best if those two folded but I kinda wonder if that will be allowed to happen
-
Very VERY BAD IDEA
-
Ahh, we'll just keep printing money. No harm in that, right? :uhsure:
Printing more money leads to more inflation. Germany, which was the Weimar Republic at the time, printed a lot of money to pay reparations as a term of the Treaty of Versailles after World War I. A million dollars was worthless and was like a penny today. This led to extremely high inflation rates, easily in the millions of percentage. And you know what that led to, the Great Depression, weak economy, and the rise of the Nazis.
-
I'd say it's about both, but I'm not going to get into it with anyone. It's buying votes and bailing at the same time.
Citibank is probably going to fold. Wells Fargo isn't far behind.
.
True. It is an election year. I do not like this idea one bit either. If Citibank and Wells Fargo fold, well that is just too bad for them. They should not have been giving out mortgages to everyone. Also, some people should not been out of their means in regards to mortgage.
-
I'd say it's about both, but I'm not going to get into it with anyone. It's buying votes and bailing at the same time.
Citibank is probably going to fold. Wells Fargo isn't far behind.
.
True. It is an election year. I do not like this idea one bit either. If Citibank and Wells Fargo fold, well that is just too bad for them. They should not have been giving out mortgages to everyone. Also, some people should not been out of their means in regards to mortgage.
They didn't have any choice. Since rhe poor are disproportionately made up of minorities, banks like Citi and Wells had to make loans to those who couldn't afford it, else face the wrath of The State under the guise of "discriminatory lending practices."
-
no argument with the vote buying
it might be best if those two folded but I kinda wonder if that will be allowed to happen
You're right, they won't be allowed to fold in that regard. Like Bear Stearns, their assets will be absorbed at a lessor value.
.
-
Let me relay to you a little bit more about where this is headed in the financial sector.
As far as the mortgage fallout, virtually everything is exposed at this point. The holding companies, Central Banks, Wall Street, etc... all know what we're dealing with and for the most part exactly how much fallout will occur. IOW, if you know with a good deal of certainty what you're dealing with, then the fear of what might happen is greatly reduced.
Not so with credit cards, which is where Citibank comes into play. Citibank gobbled up the credit card biz over the past several years, and now people are defaulting in large amounts. Citi has exposed a portion of what they are expecting in terms of loses, but the industry believes (and with very good reason) they aren't revealing but maybe about 20% of all the defaults they're going to have or are already experiencing. Naturally, Citi is holding its cards very close as to not cause panic, but the time is coming shortly when they can't do that anymore. They're already tapping into every resource that will take them to try and get some leverage, but it's a salve, they're in big trouble. Big trouble.
When all this comes to light, it's going to create major news. I don't have to remind you how the MSM will play it.
.
-
Didn't Bank of America want to buy Citi? Or was it Countrywide? I can't keep up...
How do you think the banking industry will look once the dust settles?
-
Didn't Bank of America want to buy Citi? Or was it Countrywide? I can't keep up...
How do you think the banking industry will look once the dust settles?
BOA bought Countrywide.
Like any other industry that has had issues, it'll tighen up it's practices for a while. But given time, as is the forgetful case of human nature, or at least the ability we have to convince ourselves that lightening doesn't strike twice or that we'll do a better job managing if it happens again, they'll losen up their lending practices and it'll help create the new "credit crunch of 2008."
.
-
Um?
Isn't the house the collateral of the loan? Isn't foreclosure when a lender repossesses a house or other real property? If you loaned x amount of money and rather than being paid collected x number of houses, how are you screwed?
-
I'd say it's about both, but I'm not going to get into it with anyone. It's buying votes and bailing at the same time.
Citibank is probably going to fold. Wells Fargo isn't far behind.
.
True. It is an election year. I do not like this idea one bit either. If Citibank and Wells Fargo fold, well that is just too bad for them. They should not have been giving out mortgages to everyone. Also, some people should not been out of their means in regards to mortgage.
They didn't have any choice. Since rhe poor are disproportionately made up of minorities, banks like Citi and Wells had to make loans to those who couldn't afford it, else face the wrath of The State under the guise of "discriminatory lending practices."
did they have to loan them 750,000.00 freaking dollars?
-
Um?
Isn't the house the collateral of the loan? Isn't foreclosure when a lender repossesses a house or other real property? If you loaned x amount of money and rather than being paid collected x number of houses, how are you screwed?
Liquidity and upsidedownosity.